Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ukc!mucs!liv-cs!liv!qq11
From: QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: awk arguments
Message-ID: <90207.213234QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>
Date: 26 Jul 90 20:32:34 GMT
References: <290@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> <1650@quando.quantum.de>
Organization: University of Liverpool
Lines: 28

In article <1650@quando.quantum.de>, omerzu@quando.quantum.de (Thomas Omerzu)
says:
>
....
>
>| While I am on the subject of awk: I learned about the language
>| from the book "The AWK Programming Language" by Kernighan et. al.
>| before I started working on unix. I have been disappointed to
>| find that the version actually available on every flavor of unix
>| I have seen is much weaker than the full version described by the
>| book. Are there better versions out there?
>
>Well, I don't know that book
>and thus I don't know what weaknesses you're pointing at.
>Maybe you could tell us something more specific?
>
>I've always been quite satisfied with the
>abilities of 'awk'
>
Try paying AT&T some money for a better version or better still try
the GNU version GAWK which is "fully upward compatible with the System V
Release 3.1 and later version of awk" (GAWK manual).

Alan Thew
University of Liverpool Computer Laboratory
Bitnet/Earn: QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK or QQ11%UK.AC.LIVERPOOL @ UKACRL
UUCP       : ....!mcsun!ukc!liv!qq11        Voice: +44 51 794 3735
Internet   : QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK or QQ11%LIVERPOOL.AC.UK @ NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK