On 09/08/2018 07:22 PM, TJ Luoma wrote:
> But it's gotten me to wonder:

That can be dangerous.  ;-)

> Why make any functions at all? Why not just make them all scripts? If 
> they are scripts in the $PATH then you can just call them by name and 
> they work in the login shell or in scripts. If they are functions, 
> you have to autoload them first.
> 
> So I've gotten to wonder… what makes you make something a function vs 
> a script?

IMHO it all has to do with scope.  I tend to progress along the 
following sequence when I have reason to move to the next level:

1)  alias
2)  function
3)  script

IMHO aliases enable me to be lazy and not type things out completely, or 
make what seems to be custom commands like; alias myserver='ssh myserver'.

I upgrade from aliases to functions any time I need parameters or I want 
scripts to be able to use the same command.

I upgrade from functions to scripts when I want to be able to run the 
command from outside of the shell, like an ssh remote command:  ssh 
myserver openDB.  The remote command doesn't launch the shell, thus 
doesn't have access to functions, much less aliases.  But it does have 
access to scripts if I have my PATH configured properly.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die