On 22/01/2021 21.57, Daniel Colascione wrote: > Personally, I've found that scanf underpowered for parsing modern data > formats. Bash's existing regular expression support seems perfectly > adequate to me, and it can handle everything that scanf can. I'd only > suggest extending the regular expression syntax with support for named > subgroups.
The power and easy of use of the bash input handling is already superb compared with many other languages. I won't need this scanf extension. Anything that would make bash more robust and versatile has my preference of spending time on if voting is called for. I would like a "<<<" that doesn't cut off empty lines (perhaps "<<<-" ?) and I still love the idea of ">>>variable" to direct output into a variable without needing a subshell, so "2>>>errormsg" could be used to route stderr of a pipeline into the variable errormsg. Cheers, Peter
