Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!think!ames!pacbell!att!watmath!watcgl!andrewt
From: andrewt@watsnew.waterloo.edu (Andrew Thomas)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Peter's suggestions for ash
Message-ID: <ANDREWT.89Nov21113142@watsnew.waterloo.edu>
Date: 21 Nov 89 16:31:42 GMT
References: <4573@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Sender: daemon@watcgl.waterloo.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 29
In-reply-to: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com's message of 20 Nov 89 13:15:13 GMT

In article <4573@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
	   Would it be horribly difficult to change the syntax from:

		   run $(which variable) command

	   to:

		   run `which variable` command

	   (or even

		   `which variable` command &

It is interesting that you should ask this.  The new unix shell from
the GNU project, bash, uses both the backquote syntax and the $()
syntax.  The introduction of $() is being hailed as a positive step
since it makes nested calls much much easier.  The documentation with
the shell says that the backquote facility is there only for
compatibility purposes.  I agree with Brian Fox (writer of bash) on
this issue.  If you plan to include the backquote syntax, PLEASE do
not remove the $() syntax in the process.

For those unix folks out there, give bash a try.  It is a very nice
shell. (some bugs still, but what the heck.).
--

Andrew Thomas
andrewt@watsnew.waterloo.edu	Systems Design Eng.	University of Waterloo
"If a million people do a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing." - Opus