Email List: Xaustin-group-lX
[All Lists]

Re: Re: Austin Interps 211

To: austin-group-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Re: Austin Interps 211
From: David Korn <dgk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:58:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: Austin Interps 211
--------


> From: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
> > (2) adding a sh(1) feature, already implemented in { bash ksh zsh },
> >    that does not introduce the printf(3) incompatibility, and solved
> >    the problem for all utilities
> 
> Would that not introduce an incompatibility between older and newer
> versions of /bin/sh?  Would scripts using the new feature break on older
> OSs?   That, in a nutshell and IMO, is what a /bin/sh standard should most
> avoid.  Whether { bash ksh zsh dash tcsh csh } implement the feature is
> relatively tangental.  Consistent printf behavior is certainly important,
> but as printf usage is not that common in /bin/sh scripts, relative to echo
> at least, it wouldn't seem to be a sufficient rational for changing shell
> behavior.
> 
> Roger Marquis
> 
> 

It will not break any strictly conforming shell script since the
behavior of $' is currently unspecified.  This is explicitly mentioned
at the end of section 2.6.

David Korn
dgk@research.att.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>