Akim Demaille wrote: > Le 10 juil. 2012 à 12:05, Jim Meyering a écrit : > >> Akim Demaille wrote: >> >>> Le 10 juil. 2012 à 10:14, Jim Meyering a écrit : >>> >>>>> + case $* in >>>>> + *$nl*) me_=$(printf "$me"|tr "$nl|" '??') >>>> >>>> Is it worth testing for both $nl and '|' ? >>> >>> I tried to keep what you did about $nl in $me (it would break >>> the sed command). I used printf, since the \n from echo gave >>> a spurious ? at the end of $me. >> >> I meant "is it worth *also* testing for '|' there"? >> E.g., if $me contains '|', but no newline. >> Definitely not a big issue. > > Sorry, there must be something I am missing :/.
No, 'twas I. If $me contains '|' there's no need for sed, as you say. > I use sed when there are $nl in the messages (not > in $me, just in $*). And when I use sed, I avoid characters > that can be troublesome for sed. > > But when there is no need to call sed, I just use > $me as is, including with | and \n, as it should not > be a problem.
