[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/11]
* Abigail <abigail@xxxxxxx.xx> [2006-12-11 11:15]: > On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 09:03:47PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > Actually, judging by the number of shell newbies who forget > > (or just plain don't even know) to quote their variables and > > to tell when it's necessary, I would say that the zsh guys > > are completely correct: defaulting to word splitting is > > broken. > > Claiming the default behaviour is wrong on account of what > newbies do is wrong. If that were the case, you could never criticise any language's design, so I cannot agree. I'm not saying the zsh project's decision to "fix" the language is right, I only agree with them that it's broken. I don't draw that conclusion because of newbies; I draw it because when I write shell scripts, at least 2/3s of my variable interpolations are within doublequotes, and at least 2/3s of the rest *could* be without breaking the script. Only in a very small number of cases do I specifically want word splitting; yet it's the one behaviour I get if I don't explicitly say otherwise. The newbies are a particular concern because when you need to write make-work code every time you do a common task, they are not going to know it; and the more advanced people will often be too lazy. (Just like using placeholders vs interpolating variables in SQL strings in PHP.) That doesn't mean it's a feature: those who know better just write more make-work code; they don't actually gain any advantage from the broken default. > That's like saying Ferrari got it wrong because how newbie > drivers drive. You're not seriously saying sh is a Ferrari, are you? C is a Ferrari, maybe. sh is just an early-generation Japanese car. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>;There's stuff above here
Generated at 22:02 on 27 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52