Re: lynx-dev Another proposed patch

[dickey]

> > From address@hidden Sun Nov 22 11:27:52 1998 
> > From: address@hidden 
> > Subject: Re: lynx-dev Another proposed patch 
> >  
> > In a recent note, address@hidden said: 
> >  
> > <snip> 
> > Larry's patch and mine both supply a default value instead of 
> > the NULL at execution time.  It would generate a slightly 
> > smaller executable if this were done in cfg_defs.sh, but I 
> > was daunted by the sed script. 
> >  
> > -- gil 
> >  
>  
> Might it be time to (think of) switch to perl for such things? 

no.  I'd like to add no more requirements for building Lynx than we have
already (adding perl would create more new problems than it would solve).

> Is getting pretty widespread use, I gather. 

yes.

> (Or would people be MORE daunted by perl than by sed?) 

I try to use the tool which is most suitable - sed is universally available
on Unix platforms in a pretty standard form; there's a number of versions
of perl which are incompatible to a larger extent than the subset of sed
which I use for porting scripts.

> Just something to consider sometime. 

sure - when perl is preinstalled on all Unix platforms.  awk and sed are
already there - the cfg_defs.sh script seems ok in sed, but I could fix the
reported problem by moving to awk (if nothing worse turns up, there's no
reason to change, however).
  
> David 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey