Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!xenitec!tirith!ggk From: ggk@tirith.UUCP (Gregory Kritsch) Message-ID: Date: 17 Nov 20 21:15:44 Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Wildcard types In-Reply-To: limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) References: <15517@cbmvax.commodore.com> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >In article <1990Nov16.171451.5668@gtisqr.uucp> rick@gtisqr.uucp (Hendrik Groeneveld) writes: >> expansion is the shell's job. If I don't want somthing expanded > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >What are you talking about? There is no required place for wildcard >expansion. This topic comes up every so often. There benefits and >problems with both. I can't resist doing this, but here's a totally bonkers thought for you. You know how there are various getarg()/getopt() type functions around for parsing argc/argv for a program? Well, what if the template to that was stored in a special HUNK near the beginning of the load module. A shell could then get a command line from the user, strip out the first word (command name), load the template, parse the arguments acordingly (including filename expansion for specified multiple file arguments), and pass the results of the parsing to the program after it is loaded. -- Gregory Kritsch | University of Waterloo Fido: 1:221/208.11110 [1:163/109.30] | 1A Computer Engineering OCUG: ggk@tirith.ocug.on.ca |---------------------------- UUCP: ggk@tirith.UUCP | The University doesn't get ...!watmath!xenitec!tirith!ggk | a chance to censor me!