From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Supplant the "while case ... break ;; esac" idiom Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:04:32 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <853ax5mb1j.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85myvdktb3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <20070924060521.GB10975@glandium.org> <85k5qgk295.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <86ejgowl5g.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <20070924080134.GA9112@artemis.corp> <20070924080436.GB9112@artemis.corp> <87ps08s3zt.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <20070924113556.GI8111@void.codelabs.ru> <87k5qgrxcu.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Eygene Ryabinkin , Pierre Habouzit , git@vger.kernel.org To: Miles Bader X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Sep 24 16:06:29 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IZoZC-0003bM-Fx for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:05:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755769AbXIXOFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:05:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757131AbXIXOFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:05:36 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:44962 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755769AbXIXOFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:05:36 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2007 14:05:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 24 Sep 2007 16:05:34 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+5boJtZaS5kiI7hCvzS9p1YCk3XGBjl9hvIpqA3K jiif8yK4a5dFqo X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <87k5qgrxcu.fsf@catnip.gol.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Miles Bader wrote: > Eygene Ryabinkin writes: > >> The comment "... holds only for a shell where [ is a builtin" doesn't > >> make any sense to me > > > > The 'while case ...' construct does not invoke any external commands. > > The 'while test ...' too, but only when 'test' is builtin. When > > 'test' is the external binary you get one additional fork/exec per > > each cycle. > > In practice that's not an issue though -- every reasonable shell has > test as a builtin these days, so the "works when test is not a builtin" > criteria is really important only for robustness. AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH! _Exactly_ the same reasoning can be said about the old code: _every_ reasonable shell can grok the code that used to be there! So what exactly was your point again? Ciao, Dscho