Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!jhunix!barrett From: barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Does ARP have problems? Message-ID: <7750@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> Date: 12 Mar 91 19:42:59 GMT References: <1991Mar7.201652.27356@javelin.es.com> Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF Lines: 26 In article peter@cutmcvax.cs.curtin.edu.au (Peter Wemm) writes: >It is interesting to note that almost **EVERYTHING** in arp is now in 2.0 >somewhere. Except for command-line unnamed pipes, like: $ info | sort | more This is the only reason I am still using the ARP Shell rather than the CBM shell. If I had to choose one more feature for the CBM shell, this would be it. Even MS-DOG has this syntax (yes, I know that it doesn't implement real pipes). >My advice is: If it works for you then use it! Don't ditch it because >somebody else doesn't like it. I haven't noticed any problems with using ARP 1.3, and I've used it daily for well over a year. But I don't do much script writing. Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////