entry "foo" { for ((i = 0; i < 9; i++)); do echo $i; done }
Normal executing would expand $i before running command that will break the function
That's why I parse function by the same engine that loops and conditions.
entry and function are parsed the *same* way only difference is which variable engine uses to store it (menu or function list)
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 17:01, Serbinenko Vladimir wrote:
In my scripting engine entry is parsed the same way that function.
Only difference is where contents stored but it's not written as a
normal function because it changes a bit the way the input parsed (no
expanding, ...) What do you think about it?
You can treat commands between braces as a group. In bash, a function is defined in the following way:
foo() { ... }
Or:
function foo { ... }
In both cases, the contents enclosed with braces are not evaluated but defined as the body of the function `foo'.
For me, the command `entry' is a kind of shell function. The difference between an entry and a function is that an entry is a part of a menu, while a function is a command. In other words, an entry is an anonymous function which is assigned to a slot in a menu.
So I think a clean way is to pass such a group as a single argument. For example, if the user specifies this:
entry "foo" { kernel /boot/vmlinuz; initrd /boot/initrd }
your parser would invoke grub_cmd_entry with the arguments "foo" and "kernel /boot/vmlinuz; initrd /boot/initd".
If the user specifies this:
function foo { kernel /boot/vmlinuz; initrd /boot/initrd }
it would invoke grub_cmd_function with the argument "foo" and "kernel /boot/vmlinuz; initrd /boot/initd".
This looks consistent to me.
Okuji
_______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
_______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
