Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 May 1997 17:25:59 +0300
From:      Ruslan Shevchenko <rssh@cki.ipri.kiev.ua>
To:        Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: project: editor
Message-ID:  <33772877.3D26@cki.ipri.kiev.ua>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.970512073233.21119A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Narvi wrote:

> > I think that wksh has a number of significant advantes for this
> > type of work:
> >
> > o     It's the SVR4 answer to the same problem
> >
> > o     Script portability across UNIX clone OS's
> >
> > o     Legacy Bourne shell scripts will run with few changes
> 
> *Legacy* Bourne shell scripts for a yet nonexistant document program 8-?
> 
> >
> > o     It's required for Open UNIX Standard compliance
> 
> So we could have a Open Unix compiliant document program?
> 

 It must be wary good.

> >
> >
> > The only real drawback is that there isn't a pd implementation (I
> > admit that this is a whopper of a drawback, but a grammar-based
> > set of changes in light of the wksh book shouldn't be too hard).
> >
> 
> Well, maybe I am a bit unimaginative, but I really can't imagine myself
> writing shell (Bourne, wksh, etc.) scripts in a document program 8-(
> I am afraid it wouldn't be something I (or even most people) would like.

 Yes,in addition must be some stupid sample tool.
 (in style cpp or m4)

> 
>         Sander
> 
> >
> >                                       Regards,
> >                                       Terry Lambert
> >                                       terry@lambert.org
> > ---
> > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> > or previous employers.
> >



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?33772877.3D26>