Chet Ramey wrote:
> Dave Rutherford wrote:
> > Now, "[[" isn't very well documented, so I tend not to use it,
>
> I'm always interested in suggestions for improving the bash documentation.
> Can you tell me what's unclear about the existing description of
> `[['?
It's probably my fault. I just do
I have a general question. What is expected for Bash version 4 (features,
release date, etc) ?
Is there any where I can follow its development?
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Bash-version-4-tp14740823p14740823.html
Sent from the Gnu - Bash mailing list archive a
Dave Rutherford wrote:
Now, "[[" isn't very well documented, so I tend not to use it,
I'm always interested in suggestions for improving the bash documentation.
Can you tell me what's unclear about the existing description of
`[['?
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' -
On Jan 10, 2008 3:13 PM, Frans de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To: bug-bash@gnu.org
> Subject: Comparison failure
>
> Following is a function which fails constantly. The function is being
> called by other functions but the result is nowadays always this failure
> on the compare function. Some
Frans de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You where both right. It's the '<' versus -lt. I tend to avoid -lt
> because I always run into errors using this. Beside, in previous
> versions of Bash it did not give me this problem.
AFAICS all versions of bash that implement [[ ]] have always behave
Frans de Boer schrieb:
You where both right. It's the '<' versus -lt. I tend to avoid -lt
because I always run into errors using this. Beside, in previous
versions of Bash it did not give me this problem. But, i will give it a
try in other functions to see if it works now everywhere as expected.
You where both right. It's the '<' versus -lt. I tend to avoid -lt
because I always run into errors using this. Beside, in previous
versions of Bash it did not give me this problem. But, i will give it a
try in other functions to see if it works now everywhere as expected.
And yes, the use of these
On Jan 10, 2008 8:13 AM, Frans de Boer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Following is a function which fails constantly.
[...]
> if [[ $i != -1 && $i < $((iPriTblCnt-1)) ]]; then
> echo $((i+1));
> else
> echo -1
> fi
Now, "[[" isn't very well documented, so I tend not to use it,
but noti
To: bug-bash@gnu.org
Subject: Comparison failure
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu'
-DCON
