Re: manpage clarification/addition.

[Roger]

> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 02:28:00PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
>Lest some think functions can replace aliases, there's a line in the manpage
>that I feel needs amending.  Currently it says:
>
>    "For almost every purpose, aliases are superseded by shell functions."
>
>While true, it may too likely be read by some to mean that aliases have no
>useful purpose.  So I'd suggest:
>
>    "For most purposes, aliases are superseded by shell functions, though
>aliases are still required in some situations".

The latter seems even more trickier to read then the previous.

I would suggest scrapping both attempts at clarifications and state one (maybe
two) solid pros for each and then a con for each.  Or something of a mix within
one sentence for the sake of brevity?

I've seen & worked with both and in my opinion:

---
Aliases are really meant for CLI or bashrc usage and can be quickly written.
Aliases seem to have some limitations as to what statements they may contain
as it's a one-liner.

Functions can easily contain more complicated statements, and can also be
contained within bashrc, and utilized via CLI -- but really are used within
scripts.

As far as system resources, I've heard functions are quicker.  But I don't know
if this is accurate as functions usually contain more execution statements!
---


-- 
Roger
http://rogerx.freeshell.org/