dualbus wrote:
I hadn't realized that bash already supports Unicode in function names!
FWIW:
bash-4.4$
Lēv=?
Φ=0.618033988749894848
With this terrible patch:
dualbus@debian:~/src/gnu/bash$ PAGER= git diff
Clarification, please, but it looks like with your
patch below, U
On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 8:51 PM, L A Walsh wrote:
>
>
> John McKown wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 4:48 PM, L A Walsh > b...@tlinx.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>
> OK, I did a port of BASH to an IBM "mainframe" system (IBM z) which uses
>> EBCDIC as it's character set, rather than ASCII or UNICODE.
Hi.
I used that:
cppcheck --verbose --quiet --enable=all --force --language=c --std=c89 .
I fixed some errors that were reported by cppcheck. I published that on
GitLab.com.
https://gitlab.com/RyDroid/bash
The git remote is: https://rydr...@gitlab.com/RyDroid/bash.git
The branch is cppcheck-f
Hi,
in the HISTORY section of the man-page it says:
> ... When the history file
> is read, lines beginning with the history comment character followed
> immediately by a digit are interpreted
> as timestamps for the preceding history line.
s/preceding/following/
Best,
Jörn
On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 01:46:23AM +0700, PePa wrote:
[...]
> But the fact that unicode functions are already supported does seem to
> pave the way for allowing variable names in unicode. For consistency, it
[...]
I know I said I wasn't going to reply, but this changed my mind :-)
I hadn't realiz
