Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #17095
| From | Unknown <dog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.misc |
| Subject | Re: bash script problem ? |
| Date | 2016-03-23 19:46 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <pan.2016.03.24.05.50.46@gmail.com> (permalink) |
| References | <ncc31c$gle$1@dont-email.me> <ncc3v8$iug$1@dont-email.me> <pan.2016.03.17.21.04.33@gmail.com> <ncedmh$sqc$1@dont-email.me> |
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:07:13 +0000, Joe Beanfish wrote: > On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:00:14 +0000, Unknown wrote: > >> On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 17:08:56 +0000, William Unruh wrote: >> >>> On 2016-03-16, no.top.post@gmail.com <no.top.post@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> In article <>, Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> rich@example.invalid [2016-03-10 15:22:57Z] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > Step 1, don't use the legacy sh backtick substitution syntax for >>>>> > this (because it cannot nest). Use Bash's $() substitution >>>>> > instead (because it can nest). >>>>> >>>>> I agree that $() is better but ``'s can nest:=20 >>>>> >>>>> $ echo Year: `date \`echo +%Y\`` >>>>> Year: 2016 >>>>> >>>> That's spooky ! Who <associated> +%Y with "2016" ? >>> >>> The command "date" did. This says to run the date command with the >>> argument being the output of the echo command. In this case the latter >>> as +%Y so this is running date +%Y which is the year in which the date >>> command was run. The ouput is then the argument to the outter echo >>> command. >>> >>> >>>> Lets have some examples of nesting, without extra spooky-stuf. >>> >>> extra spooky-stuf? >>> man date >>> >>> >> date `echo +%Y` == 2016 >> echo `date \`echo +%M\`` == 33 >> echo `date \`echo +%D\`` == 03/17/16 date `echo +%M` == 35 >> date `echo +%D` == 03/17/16 >> >> There's nesting: lisp; & there's concatenation/piping; but this is a >> load of ad-hoc crap! >> >> >> BTW `wily` is great for this. >> No need to touch the kybrd. > > <soapbox> > Not crap, beauty. The command line lets you form things the original > author didn't conceive of. Unlike most GUIs which only allow the small > set of things the author thought to allow you to do. > > Sure the above examples are contrived and one would normally just > date +%Y > But in a more complex situation as your original script the ad-hoc > ability of the command line is very useful and powerful. </soapbox> We're losing each other. 1. ad-hoc is when there are many ways of "saying it" instead of having a minimalist/limited syntax: like lego or bricks&mortat or lisp. When I looked at Ruby I remember you could <terminate statements with ";" or not>. That's bad. Redundancy is to be avoided. 2. GUI usually means 'cartoon based' - US-style. <mouse based> text means you execute a 50-char command with one-action, without; 1. need to rememeber it - you recognise and select it from a menu; 2. no need to look away from the screen and lose 'focus'. Here's an example of what wily does for me [ETHOberon is better because it's got colors, which helps decode my cryptic short-hand]: Mwt <-- writes the TextToSpeech-Menu for Wily; which looks like:- 1=Select DestName & M2M1: |Arg1 to /mnt/h15/var/CONTROL/WtmpL 2=Append Text Selection & M2 |Apnd1 : to tail -2 /var/CONTROL/WApnd 3=M2 DLt2wavMul : <1>.mp3 to /mnt/h14/home/crg/mul/ ^ M2M1 rm As stated, this mess is better understood with colors. The task is to copy text to <speech>.mp3 to a mobile phone. There are 2 args: 1. the text-stretch, identified by its begin and end; 2. the chosen name of the *.mp3 But I wanted to make it more versatile by being able to append pieces of text to a buffer,to a get a minimum of 5 minutes speech. If I see a suitable name anywhere on the screen, it's 2 cliks to select that name: 1 to <select> it plus a klux[mouse chord] on "|Arg1" in line 1. I must first delete the buffer contents of the previous job. This needs 2 cliks: 1. select "/mnt/h15/var/CONTROL/WtmpL" which is the buffer @ line 2; 2. <chord> on "rm" in line 3 To mark the text-stretch to be appended to the buffer, need2 2 cliks on the start and end. 2+2=4 Finally 1 clik on line 3's DLt2wavMul, converts the buufer's text to <chosenName>.mp3 ready to be used. mouse chording listed as "M2M1" to remind me, means press buttom-2 and button-1, is handled better with ETHOberons colors [from where wily, the PublicDomain version of plan9's acme is COPIED] ETHOberon would write the 2 clik commands in green and the 2 chords in red, which is more intuitive than needing to read & decode "M2M1". NB. the designers of unix, went on to make plan9, to do it properly; -- from what I've read. Don't confuse menu-driven, point-and-chord with cartoon-based systems. OTOH for users doing what they are familiar with, and it's all in their head, reflex-like piano-playing is OK, since they don't need to see the screen. Your dog catches a ball by reflex too. PS. you notice I've got: tail -2 /var/CONTROL/WApnd which I can just wipe & clik, to see if the buffer is clean, or what was the last text appended. That's 26 + 1 = 27 keystrokes for piano-players.
Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: bash script problem ? no.top.post@gmail.com - 2016-03-16 16:53 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-03-16 17:08 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 11:00 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2016-03-17 14:07 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 19:46 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 01:52 +0000
Re: bash script problem ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2016-03-23 21:31 -0700
Re: bash script problem ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-03-23 21:53 -0700
Re: bash script problem ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2016-03-16 17:43 +0000
csiph-web