Re: [Texmacs-dev] Plugins and the echo command

[Miguel de Benito Delgado]

So, it seems safe to replace all occurences of "echo -n " with "printf
", what about speed or weird side effects?

Search and replace is our friend, people...
________________
Miguel de  Benito.


On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Sam Liddicott <address@hidden> wrote:
> Your well expressed comments do not fit the question.
>
> I wonder if you realised that printf is a shell built-in command with better
> portability than echo, and here does not refer to the C library.
>
> Sam
>
> On Jul 25, 2012 8:04 PM, "Adrian S." <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> I am against making it a requirement.  I think plugins are to be
>> mantained, and if the one who writes  them knows C, he can write them
>> in C; if he knows bash; he could write them in bash.
>>
>> If compatibility issues were the main concern, we could let people
>> know about the caveats of using each programming language, and some
>> guidelines about what kinds of plugins are guaranteed or more likely
>> to work in all environments... I am afraid that, in that case, any
>> *nix shell would not meet the crossplatform criteria.
>>
>> People would debate  on  "We suggests that you..." vs "We demand that
>> you..."; but, either way, both could agree on  "We want to make you
>> aware of...".
>>
>> I am familiar with the issue, since a long time ago there was a push
>> to remove all the
>> echo -ne
>> and then only use standard shell techniques...  I don't think it
>> worked well. And then ubuntu make a softlink from /usr/bin/sh to
>> /usr/bin/dash instead of /usr/bin/bash; which all of a sudden broke a
>> lot of plugings, because they were changed to #!/bin/bash.. At some
>> point most using shells needed bash, but had as header !#/bin/sh....
>> in the plugin
>>
>>   And we spend time wondering what happened...  The point was: They
>> needed bash, so they should have #!/bin/bash, not #!/bin/sh...
>>
>> My point is: Some plugins requrie bash.  If we only change the "echo
>> -ne" we are still not guraranteed to have any issues for other
>> reasons.  The way to do it is to tell the developper... Or at least
>> make him or her aware of the issue... Not to force him to use a
>> particular language or a particular shell.
>>
>> A tool or a script that transform each using echo -ne, could be made,
>> but someone must be responsable of mantaining it...  Certainly, if the
>> one who wrote the plugin used bash, this would be a requirement for
>> his or her plugin.
>>
>> Soon, though, we will have a model for all plugins when the mathemagix
>> plugin becomes the model for all other plugins and the suggested way
>> in which plugins should be written and docummented to assure
>> portability.
>>
>> Those are my two cents.
>>
>> Peace.
>> -Adrian.
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Sam Liddicott <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > He is correct to advocate printf. There is an entry in the bash FAQ in
>> > relation to portable programming that endorses his view.
>> >
>> > Sam
>> >
>> > On Jul 25, 2012 5:37 PM, "Miguel de Benito Delgado"
>> > <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Any thoughts on this anyone? I know very little about shell
>> >> compatibility issues..
>> >> ________________
>> >> Miguel de  Benito.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Bernd Losert <address@hidden>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > I am not sure if this has been pointed out or not, but a lot of the
>> >> > plugin code in src/plugins/*/bin/tm_* uses the echo command in such a
>> >> > way that it only works correctly if your shell is bash. I use zsh as
>> >> > my shell and when I run something like xypic for example, I always
>> >> > get
>> >> > these -n when the session starts. To avoid this issue, I suggest
>> >> > rewriting anything with echo with printf instead as the behavior of
>> >> > printf is the same across *NIX systems, unlike with echo.
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Bernd
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Texmacs-dev mailing list
>> >> > address@hidden
>> >> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Texmacs-dev mailing list
>> >> address@hidden
>> >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Texmacs-dev mailing list
>> > address@hidden
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Texmacs-dev mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Texmacs-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>