|
From: | Bauke Jan Douma |
Subject: | Re: [RFC] {print,}env -0 |
Date: | Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:07:24 +0100 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) |
Jim Meyering wrote on 10/26/2009 08:43 PM:
Pádraig Brady wrote:Eric Blake wrote:Since environment variables may contain newlines, but env and printenv currently separate output entries via newline, we have a case of ambiguous output. For example, "env | sed -n '/^a.*=/ s,=.*,,p'" does not necessarily tell you the set of environment variables beginning with "a", because I could have done "export b=$'\na=c'". What do list readers think of the idea of adding: env -0/--null printenv -0/--null as a means of unambiguously representing the current contents of the environment with NUL terminators instead of newlines?It's consistent and makes sense. I've not needed it myself (I think :)), but I would say it's worth adding.I'm on the fence, partly because you can simulate printenv -0 with this: perl -e 'print map {"$_=$ENV{$_}\0"} keys %ENV' You can simulate env -0 the same way. Certainly, env -0 and printenv -0 are easier to type and use. Not strongly for or against.
... ah, Jim, but this is /core/utils no? Wouldn't you agree therefore that historically as well as OS-constitutionally coreutils are more fundamental than perl? And, perhaps, therefore --at least in this case-- it has no business of referring to a youngster like perl? ;-) In short, personally, my hand's up for the proposition, given the example. bjd
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |