>>>>> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Actually, I was informed by John W. Eaton through private email
Lars> that the 'in "$@"' part is the default and can therefore be
Lars> dropped. My opinion on this (which is influenced by my personal
Lars> sh-scripting conventions) is that "for elt; do" is a bit less
Lars> readable than the full thing.
It is true, but I don't think you can portably leave the do on the
same line, you have to:
for arg
do
done
but this may be an hallucination of my memory.
Akim
Lars> : If we expect a good shell, then : eval set -- $list : is fine.
Lars> I think the dummy-approach is safest. I didn't look into which
Lars> context this was to be used in, but I'd probably name it
Lars> _ac_dummy or something like that...
`dummy' is just a string here, there is no problems. And it's an
idiom, we should keep it as is (I have a friend who, when he was a
student in physics, loved to name `n' or `i' the reals, `x' the
integers, \gamma a force, `V' for pressure and the like :)
Akim
