Article View: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Article #6459Re: PIPEs
From: Ken Yarnall
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 1990 23:52
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 1990 23:52
52 lines
3116 bytes
3116 bytes
In article <6997@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
+In article <1990Nov4.215000.2760@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu> yarnall@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu (Ken Yarnall) writes:
+> I really dislike wildcard expansion in the shell. Granted, it would have
+> been nicer in 1.3, since there was no library support of standard pattern
+> matching, but now that 2.0 has good, standardized routines to do this, I
+> can't for the life of me see how shell expansion is superior.
+
+(a) There are still machines outthere running 1.3. Like, most of them.
True, but most utilities that need pattern matching coded it in, and there
has always been a standard, even if it wasn't directly supported. Now it is.
+(b) You still need quoting conventions. Quickly, how do you delete a file
+ named "#?.c"? Why not use them consistently?
Of course you do -- I never tried to imply that we could get rid of
quoting...unless we go to really restricted filenaming, ala DOS. What I
would like is a nice, intuitive, consistent system, which would minimize the
need for quoting, and make those instances where it is needed clear. I do
not think that is the case in the unix shells.
+(c) You're at the mercy of programmers who neglect to provide for it. VAX/VMS
+ has had wildcard libraries forever, and it still trips me up. That's how
+ you get files named "#?.c" in the first place.
Er, I'm not at the mercy of anybody. If a utility should make patterns
available (imho), and doesn't, and it is a serious problem to me, I look for
a replacement. Really, most of the programs that will need it are filesystem
support utilities, which now have it in uniformity. For 1.3, there are
replacements for the C: commands that don't implement it.
At any rate, the real question was, which is better, not which was more
readily available in AmigaDOS. 1.3 had the worst of both worlds -- neither
shell nor library expansion. 2.0, I think, has the best. It is up to
programmers, if they want their programmers to be flexible and robust, to use
them. And there is always the arp.library for 1.3,
+
+For things like "move", I'd rather go to slices:
+
+ move {.*}.c \1.h
Yeah, right. That is much clearer...:-)
+Peter da Silva. `-_-'
ken
--
Ken Yarnall /// yarnall@usceast.cs.scarolina.EDU
Math Department, USC \\\/// yarnall@ucseast.UUCP
Columbia, S.C. 29208 \\\/ (803)777-5218
`You'd better tie me up.' -- from the movie, "Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1990Nov7.235254.13959@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!opusc!yarnallReferences:
<6984@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1990Nov4.215000.2760@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu> <6997@sugar.hackercorp.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!hubcap!ncrcae!opusc!yarnall From: yarnall@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu (Ken Yarnall) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: PIPEs Message-ID: <1990Nov7.235254.13959@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu> Date: 7 Nov 90 23:52:54 GMT References: <6984@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1990Nov4.215000.2760@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu> <6997@sugar.hackercorp.com> Organization: Math Department, University of South Carolina (ahem; The USC) Lines: 52