From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from relay1.UU.NET ([192.48.96.5]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2720>; Wed, 26 May 1993 13:50:34 -0400
Received: from spool.uu.net (via LOCALHOST) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP 
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA12512; Wed, 26 May 93 13:50:12 -0400
Received: from srg.UUCP by spool.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL
	(queueing-rmail) id 134827.21084; Wed, 26 May 1993 13:48:27 EDT
Received: from ceres.srg.af.mil by srg.srg.af.mil
	id aa04808; Wed, 26 May 93 13:37:18 EDT
From:	culliton@srg.af.mil (Tom Culliton x2278)
X-Mailer: SCO System V Mail (version 3.2)
To:	haahr@mv.us.adobe.com
Subject: Re:  Differences between Duff's rc and Byron's
Cc:	rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
Date:	Wed, 26 May 1993 13:38:26 -0400
Message-Id: <9305261338.aa04012@ceres.srg.af.mil>

Paul Hahr writes:

> > - $" vs. $^
> > > This seems like an arbitrary difference.
> Byron's $^ preceeded td's $".  if you look at older versions of the
> bell labs rc man page, it's not there.

I seemed to remember something like this and wondered why Duff did it
different.
 
> > - pattern matching, word vs. list
> > > This fixes something noted as a bug in the Plan 9 man page.
> i don't know what you mean by this comment.  i don't think Byron's
> ~ operator is any different from td's.

The Plan 9 man pages say "~ subject pattern ..." where subject is
singular (Duff's paper says "a string") and under BUGS the Plan 9 man
page says "There should be a way to match patterns against whole lists
rather than just single strings."  Byron allows subject to be a list.

I also forgot one we discussed before, functions that look like path
names, i.e. "fn /bin/csh { echo 'you''ve got to be kidding!' }" are
allowed in Duff's rc.  There are probably more minor differences like
this that got missed.

Tom