Bob Proulx <bob <at> proulx.com> writes: > I assume that 'ls' isn't what you actually are doing, that you have > reduced the test case to something smaller (thank you for that!) > because the shell can list the directory itself. >
Yup, doing 'ls' wasn't what I needed: it was just the first nonsense/nontrivial example it came to my mind. I was just wondering if there were a syntax for manipulating expanded strings instead of variables, because at first saw it seemed something lacking: I usually don't like to have temporary variables just for a single manipulation, whatever is the language. Anyway, I figured that using the 'for' construct for my task is more compact and safe almost as well as doing without. Thanks a lot for the hint. Greetings, Francesco
