groff
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [groff] 1.22.4.rc4 - Final RC before official 1.22.4


From: Ingo Schwarze
Subject: Re: [groff] 1.22.4.rc4 - Final RC before official 1.22.4
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 14:32:00 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23)

Hi Bertrand, hi Ralph,

Ralph Corderoy wrote on Sun, Dec 09, 2018 at 10:36:25AM +0000:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:

>> Ouch.  My first attempt to fix this with "test -n" failed miserably:
>>
>>   [...]
>>   if test -n ""; then \
>>     for f in ; do \
>>       cp -f $f /home/schwarze/Local9/share/man/man5/g`basename $f`; \
>>     done; \
>>   fi
>>   bash: -c: line 2: syntax error near unexpected token `;'

> The time-honoured way to achieve this is using the built-in `set'.
> 
>     $ l='foo bar xyzzy'
>     $ set -- $l; for f; do echo f=$f; done | fmt
>     f=foo f=bar f=xyzzy
>     $
[...]
>     $ l=
>     $ set -- $l; for f; do echo f=$f; done | fmt
>     $ set -- $l; for f; do echo f=$f; done | wc -c
>     0
>     $ 

Good point, indeed i wasn't aware of that technique.
Arguably, using it is less intrusive than deleting the very likely
usused variables.

Then again, i already have an OK from gbranden@ to remove the
variables, and we should probably remove them after release anyway.

What do you guys want:

Should i push my patch to remove the two variables,
or rework it using Ralph's suggestion instead?

Yours,
  Ingo



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]