spellberg_robert email...@emailrob.com wrote:
my killer_app, -- a priori --, depends upon
the use of a good general_purpose macro_processor [b].
i thought that i had found one in m4(1),
Personally I think m4 is weird and error-prone.
Another possibility is to use cpp (the C
Brett Glass br...@lariat.net wrote:
As I understand it, when it comes to UNIX result codes, 0 doesn't
really mean true -- it means no error. (In other words, it
means false.) Whereas any nonzero value means there was an error
(and indicates what kind). In other words, it means that it's
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 03:48:35AM +0100, Adrian Wontroba wrote:
No wonder I don't use short circuit operators much. When zero
equals one, it gets rather confusing.
I agree that they can be confusing. Forget the 0 and 1, just think of
success and failure.
It's also confusing that they
Actually I've never regarded and || (and also |
and ) as operators, like real operators in a programming
language, but as command separators, much like ;, but
with special semantics.
Note that
foo bar baz
foo || bar || baz
is the same as
if foo; then if bar; then baz; fi; fi
if
Adrian Wontroba a...@stade.co.uk writes:
Perhaps the syntax could have been and / or (as in Perl's
and / or statement qualifiers (something() or die oops;), but it is
far too late to change sh syntax. We have to live with it or use a
different shell or language.
Pop quiz: what are the
The only problem to me is that it says AND-OR since they are not C-style
logical operators.
It should just say conditional execution.
___
freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 04:57:12PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
Short-Circuit List Operators
``'' and ``||'' are AND-OR list operators. ``'' executes the first
command, and then executes the second command if the exit status of the
first command is zero. ``||'' is similar, but
At 06:01 PM 7/17/2009, Adrian Wontroba wrote:
No it is succinctly correct but confusing (the UNIX way?). These
operators work on exit codes where 0 = success = true and and !0 =
failure = false.
As I understand it, when it comes to UNIX result codes, 0 doesn't
really mean true -- it means no
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 07:21:14PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
At 06:01 PM 7/17/2009, Adrian Wontroba wrote:
No it is succinctly correct but confusing (the UNIX way?). These
operators work on exit codes where 0 = success = true and and !0 =
failure = false.
As I understand it, when it comes to
