A Bourne shell irritation: no wildcard matching operatorHere is an irritation that gets me every so often: the Bourne shell has
no wildcard match operator that you can use in (Bash has the This comes up surprisingly often, at least in the sort of shell scripts
that I write. It's not insurmountable but it is inconvenient and it
can make my shell scripts read less clearly. Later shells, such as
Plan 9's (Yes, there is a workaround if you are doing this often enough.) Of course, like a lot of things about the Bourne shell there are
historical and philosophical reasons for this. The biggest one is
a programming language design issue: you really want your wildcard
matching operator to have shell support so that you do not have to keep
quoting the wildcards themselves. Philosophically, the only good place
to put this in the Bourne shell is as part of explicit shell syntax (ie,
in a (Tom Duff was willing to be this magical when creating The difficulty is compounded because the natural place to put such an
operator is in PS: Sidebar: the workaround
Then you can say ' (One comment.)
|
These are my WanderingThoughts GettingAround This is part of CSpace, and is written by ChrisSiebenmann. * * * Atom feeds are available; see the bottom of most pages. Categories: links, linux, programming, python, snark, solaris, spam, sysadmin, tech, unix, web |