Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:19447 comp.unix.questions:17934
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!cbmvax!amix!ag
From: ag@amix.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Question about GETOPT(3)
Message-ID: <118@amix.commodore.com>
Date: 22 Nov 89 18:07:04 GMT
References: <7043@ficc.uu.net> <110@amix.commodore.com> <7077@ficc.uu.net>
Reply-To: ag@amix.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski)
Organization: Commodore Amix Development
Lines: 21

>> 	command >&1
>(and	command && command)
>
>> does not break '&' normal use because it is used in the twople '>&'
>
>So &1 would be a similar dipthong, with no white space allowed.

but

	command1&command2

is currently valid syntax in the bourne shell.  Should we break this
because some people can't put

	S=/dev/stdin;export S

in their .profile?
-- 
ag@amix.commodore.com        Keith Gabryelski          ...!cbmvax!amix!ag