From: Alan Watson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: builtins, changes et al
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1993 09:20:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9309201320.AA13632@oldp.astro.wisc.edu> (raw)
> I don't like the idea of a builtin read
> with sh semantics too much. I'd prefer a more general solution,
> some kind of printf - scanf pair which is _not_ builtin. It's already
> part of the GNU shellutils.
The people who have expressed a desire for a built in read (including
myself) have normally used performance as their justification (in the
same way that echo is justified). Your suggestion does nothing for
I feel that the man page for and implementation of a shell level scanf
will be horrid.
next reply other threads:[~1993-09-20 13:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1993-09-20 13:20 Alan Watson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1993-09-20 9:42 malte
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).