On 5/25/06, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what i would propose, if i thought that both the bash and zsh
> development teams would be interested in them, would be about 10
> improvements, including a portable built in xargs and xargs -0 from
> the get-go.
Have you looked at zargs?
zargs is completely different from xargs and xargs -0. it is also nonportable.
i would like something that takes lines or NUL-separated lines as
input and performs the
command on them. zargs does not do that and does not exist in bash.
the shell script i provided is portable and does that, but it's a
serious issue to write it,
it isn't clear that it works in all edge cases, and it probably has
efficiency issues.
zargs looks nice for what it does, though.
> but i will limit my ambitions and propose a truly raw read -r. this
> is because i think that both teams would want that.
You're proposing this?
> IFS=$'\n' read -r "$1"
no.
as i explained, i already use that solution.
if you want to say that it's wrong to change the behavior of read -r,
then i'll accept that.
but in that case it wouldn't hurt to change the docs in all 3 shells
to emphasize that
leading spaces are dangerous and mention ifs as the solution.
ideally, however,
some of the limitations to the shells that made it into the comments
in the script i
provided would be solved, or xargs and xargs -0 would be worked out portably for
both shells and included either as improvements to my script or as
efficient portable builtins.
take a look at the comments in the script.
of course, it's all up to the devs. if they think i'm wrong, then
kill the bug. but surely they
can see the merit in enabling a common type of loop.
thanks.
--
Webmaster: do you believe that people will (a) switch browsers to view
your "best viewed with" page or (b) go to your competitor?
