Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread Giacomo
Il 16 Maggio 2017 19:11:33 CEST, Kurt H Maier ha scritto: >On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 03:32:09PM -0400, s...@9front.org wrote: >> Honestly, the equality sign is never a problem for me. >> What is the purpose again of making this change? >> >> sl > >Why won't anyone answer this question? Rc run

Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread hiro
imo instead of changing = behavior * and ? should give errors like following if unmatched. rc: #d/0: token '*': syntax error rc: #d/0: token '?': syntax error

Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 03:32:09PM -0400, s...@9front.org wrote: > Honestly, the equality sign is never a problem for me. > What is the purpose again of making this change? > > sl Why won't anyone answer this question? Is bikeshedding a minor inconvenience worth this kind of complexity? khm

Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread Giacomo Tesio
Tonight I've tried this little hack, but I do not have a comprehensive test suite (does any exists?) https://github.com/JehanneOS/jehanne/commit/003141901af25f0bb3556be40b7ff963f57ced32 I thought that there's no reason to mimic sh for this since if you need sh to run a script rc won't work anyway

Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread Erik Quanstrom
by doing it in the grammar, the redirection issue is avoided.- erikOn May 16, 2017 2:24 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:On 15 May 2017 at 17:44, trebol wrote:> = is part of rc syntax, like {} and (), and it interprets it, not thei'd forgotten about the = in >[2=1], so you'd need

Re: [9fans] equality sign in Rc

2017-05-16 Thread Charles Forsyth
On 15 May 2017 at 17:44, trebol wrote: > > = is part of rc syntax, like {} and (), and it interprets it, not the i'd forgotten about the = in >[2=1], so you'd need another exception ... rc would interpret that, but then in [a-b=] it presumably wouldn't again...