On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 14:56:02 + Matthew Szudzik
wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 12:43:05AM -0800, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> > If I use redirection rather than piping for input to the `while`
> > loop, it is not a separate process, and works like the 'for' loop.
>
> I have seen some Unix systems w
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 12:43:05AM -0800, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> If I use redirection rather than piping for input to the `while` loop,
> it is not a separate process, and works like the 'for' loop.
I have seen some Unix systems where this doesn't work, either. See
http://groups.google.com/grou
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 08:51:31 +0100 Matthias Kilian
wrote:
> n Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 10:18:39PM -0800, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> > When you append to a variable within a 'for' loop, the changes are
> > exist after the loop ends, but if you do the same within a 'while'
> > loop, the changes are lost?
> [
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:18 PM, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> I've been looking for standards on "correct" variable scope in ksh but
> the IEEE Std 1003.1-2008 stuff on the Open Group site doesn't mention
> any rules?
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/contents.html
The key secti
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 10:18:39PM -0800, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> When you append to a variable within a 'for' loop, the changes are
> exist after the loop ends, but if you do the same within a 'while'
> loop, the changes are lost?
[...]
> # Now we try the same type of thing with the 'while' loop.
>
5 matches
Mail list logo