On 06-03-17 16:09, Geir Hauge wrote:
> If you're counting milliseconds, pattern matching should be slightly
> faster than your -eq hack.
Without benchmarks, I'll take your word for this.
But this really convinced me:
> See also http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/054
"this method fails if the sh
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:31:31PM +0100, Rob la Lau wrote:
> On 06-03-17 15:16, Reuti wrote:
> > if ! expr "$x" : '[[:digit:]]*$' >/dev/null; then echo no; fi
> >
> > if [ -n "${x//[0-9]/}" ]; then echo no; fi
>
> True, but regular expressions are usually considered expensive.
> (Must admit I ne
On 6 March 2017 14:09:39 GMT+00:00, Rob la Lau wrote:
>On 06-03-17 14:18, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> You're misunderstanding. In a math context, which you are creating
>here
>> by using -eq, the word 'x' is interpreted as a variable name, which
>may
>> contain another variable name, and so on, until
On 06-03-17 15:16, Reuti wrote:
> if ! expr "$x" : '[[:digit:]]*$' >/dev/null; then echo no; fi
>
> if [ -n "${x//[0-9]/}" ]; then echo no; fi
True, but regular expressions are usually considered expensive.
(Must admit I never benchmarked.)
And I know 1 regex won't considerably slow down my scri
> Am 06.03.2017 um 15:09 schrieb Rob la Lau :
>
> On 06-03-17 14:18, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> You're misunderstanding. In a math context, which you are creating here
>> by using -eq, the word 'x' is interpreted as a variable name, which may
>> contain another variable name, and so on, until final
On 06-03-17 14:18, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> You're misunderstanding. In a math context, which you are creating here
> by using -eq, the word 'x' is interpreted as a variable name, which may
> contain another variable name, and so on, until finally an integer is
> discovered.
Thanks. Now that I know
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 01:15:58PM +0100, Rob la Lau wrote:
> Looking a bit further: it doesn't do any comparison on the given strings:
>
> $ [[ "x" -eq "y" ]] && echo "yes" || echo "no"
> yes
You're misunderstanding. In a math context, which you are creating here
by using -eq, the word 'x' is i
On 3/4/17 7:15 AM, Rob la Lau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm not sure whether I found a bug in Bash or in it's documentation.
>
> The documentation suggests that the arithmetic binary operator '-eq' is
> for integers ("Arg1 and arg2 may be positive or negative integers."),
> but when using it with '[[ ]
