On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:14 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> On 6/19/24 6:12 PM, konsolebox wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, have BASH_SOURCE always produce real physical paths
> > either by default or through a shopt.
>
> This is the best option. I don't think changing bash to do this by default
> would hav
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024, 03:14 Chet Ramey, wrote:
> On 6/19/24 6:12 PM, konsolebox wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, have BASH_SOURCE always produce real physical paths
> > either by default or through a shopt.
>
> This is the best option. I don't think changing bash to do this by default
> would have nega
On 6/26/24 5:59 AM, konsolebox wrote:
That's great. So will this be implemented soon or will you consider
other lazy alternatives first?
What `lazy alternatives' did you have in mind?
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' -
On 6/25/24 2:49 PM, Mark March wrote:
Bump in case this fell through the cracks. My simple script that uses no job
control facilities (in fact, turns job control off) if run in the background
would log the user out on any keyboard input. This can't be right. Can you at
least confirm that thi
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:57 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> What `lazy alternatives' did you have in mind?
I replied to Martin D Kealey about it but looking at the email now it
seems like he's referring to something involving BASH_SOURCE_PATH
instead of BASH_SOURCE. I misinterpreted.
I'm thinking if pe
Le 26/06/2024 à 14:17, Martin D Kealey écrivait :
Just to be clear, would this result in $0 and ${BASH_SOURCE[@]:(-1):1}
potentially yielding different values?
There is no reason it would alter the content of $0 which remains the
name of the command involved.
The arguments vector with index
On 6/11/24 6:48 AM, Zachary Santer wrote:
My mind returns to this nonsense, as I find a use for it.
Imagine this functionality:
$ array=( zero one two three four five six )
$ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
one
five
I'm not inclined to implement this. I don't like the syntax and there are
printf %s\\n "${arr[@]:1:5}"
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
> Was "bash tries to parse comsub in quoted PE pattern"
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 8:19 AM Zachary Santer wrote:
> >
> > In Bash 5.2:
> > $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> > $ printf '%s\n' "${array[
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:58 AM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> On 6/11/24 6:48 AM, Zachary Santer wrote:
>
> > My mind returns to this nonsense, as I find a use for it.
> >
> > Imagine this functionality:
> > $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> > $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
> > one
> >
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 14:09:13 -0400, Zachary Santer wrote:
> > > Imagine this functionality:
> > > $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> > > $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
> > > one
> > > five
> I did want to see if others would find this valuable, and no one spoke
> up, so it's
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:19 AM alex xmb sw ratchev wrote:
>
> printf %s\\n "${arr[@]:1:5}"
For my array below, this would give you
one
two
three
four
five
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
>>
>> $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
>> $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@](
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 8:19 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:19 AM alex xmb sw ratchev
> wrote:
> >
> > printf %s\\n "${arr[@]:1:5}"
>
> For my array below, this would give you
> one
> two
> three
> four
> five
>
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
> >>
On 6/26/24 2:18 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
$ array=( zero one two three four five six )
$ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
one
five
This is different functionality.
Equivalent to printf '%s\n' "${array[1}" "${array[5]}". The innovation
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, 8:30 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 6/26/24 2:18 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> >>> $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
> >>> one
> >>> five
> >
> > This is diffe
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 2:30 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> On 6/26/24 2:18 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer wrote:
> >>>
> >>> $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> >>> $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
> >>> one
> >>> five
> >
> > This is diff
I've found some existing code that will break if words in ${BASH_SOURCE[@]}
don't match the filepath given to '.' or 'source':
[[ ${BASH_ARGV[0]} = "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}" ]]
which is part of a test to determine whether any args were provided after
"source filename".
I use this at the end of my file
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 at 06:30, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 6/26/24 2:18 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024, 12:49 PM Zachary Santer
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> $ array=( zero one two three four five six )
> >>> $ printf '%s\n' "${array[@]( 1 5 )}"
> >>> one
> >>> five
> >
> > This is diffe
On Thursday, June 27, 2024, Martin D Kealey wrote:
> [...]
That's too much to read and Perl is not a good example to follow. Why not
extend the arithmetic expansion syntax to allow generating multiple results
when subscripting indexed arrays? Like `${a[1; 2; 4]}', `${a[3..5; 7]}',
`${a[1..10..3
18 matches
Mail list logo
