Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!public!eeh
From: eeh@public.BTR.COM (Eduardo E. Horvath  eeh@btr.com)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: PIPEs
Message-ID: <890@public.BTR.COM>
Date: 3 Nov 90 22:26:55 GMT
References: <53407.657565922@atronx.UUCP> <1990Nov3.073201.8227@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA, Contact: cs@btr.com 415-966-1429
Lines: 32

In article <1990Nov3.073201.8227@agate.berkeley.edu> pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes:
>
>
>In  <53407.657565922@atronx.UUCP>, Russell McOrmond (rwm@atronx.UUCP) writes:
>> In a message posted on 2 Nov 90 09:15:42 GMT,
>> pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) wrote:

>> PG>make the Shell suitably smart -- AND design a suitable syntax. (Avoid "|"
>> PG>please!)

>> What's wrong with that notation?
>>                                  If you don't like that, what do YOU suggest.


	What about "=" ?  It even looks alot more lile a pipe than "|".  I think
that the only place "=" will cause problems would be when using something like 
set or in scripts where you are doing comparisons.  In scripts, just look for
"==" or ">=", etc.  Set can be modified to allow something like:

set FRED 55
	or
set "FRED=55"

both give the same results (i.e. FRED=55.)  Is there anything else that using 
"=" as a pipe would break?


-- 
=========================================================================
Eduardo Horvath				eeh@btr.com
					..!{decwrl,mips,fernwood}!btr!eeh
	"Trust me, I am cognizant of what I am doing." - Hammeroid