scsh-hackers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Scsh-hackers] Proposal for packaging of scsh libraries

To: Michel Schinz <Michel.Schinz@epfl.ch>
Subject: Re: [Scsh-hackers] Proposal for packaging of scsh libraries
From: Anthony Carrico <acarrico@memebeam.org>
Date: Wed Nov 5 14:10:23 2003
Cc: Martin Gasbichler <gasbichl@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>, scsh-hackers@lists.sourceforge.net
List-id: Discussion among the implementors <scsh-hackers.lists.sourceforge.net>
Sender: scsh-hackers-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:29:39PM +0100, Michel Schinz wrote:
> Anthony Carrico <acarrico@memebeam.org> writes:
> and then the tilde is inside single quotes, and therefore not expanded
> anymore... I'm sure there's a solution to that, but I believe it's not
> trivial. I would be delighted to be proven wrong, though.

Sorry, I missed that.

I'm not a shell expert (I must read the manuals to do anything), but
you could do:
  bash$ SCSH_LIB_DIR=\"$HOME/projects/scsh-packages/root\"

or get true tilde expansion with command substitution:
  bash$ SCSH_LIB_DIR=\"$(echo ~/projects/scsh-packages/root)\"

or with old style command substitution:
  bash$ SCSH_LIB_DIR=\"`echo ~/projects/scsh-packages/root`\"

They are all ugly, but you can't blame Unix ugliness on scsh. I think
the point still stands that it isn't really scsh's job to tilde expand
that variable.

> Yes, for me version 1.2.3 is smaller than 1.20.3 (since the first
> components of the two versions are equal, but the second are 2 and 20,
> respectively, which means that the first is smaller). Do you think it
> should be otherwise?

I agree that 1.2.3 is a smaller version than 1.20.3. I don't know if
1.2.3 is lexicographically smaller than 1.20.3. I guess it seems to be
true though:

scsh> (if (string< "1.2.3" "1.20.3") #t #f)
#t

-- 
Anthony Carrico


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>