X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:14:46 +0200 From: Aaron Schneider User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: length in gawk returns wrong value References: <20120719092024.GA31055@calimero.vinschen.de> <20120719113927.GH31055@calimero.vinschen.de> <20120719145544.GL31055@calimero.vinschen.de> <50083976.8020804@hones.org.uk> <50083DA9.2030104@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <50083DA9.2030104@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On 19/07/2012 19:02, Eric Blake wrote: > > Why bother? csh syntax is non-standard, and in my opinion, it is ugly > (others around here disagree, or tcsh would have died long ago, but > that's a different story - it's mostly people that were on a system that > picked csh as its default shell long before standardization picked > Bourne over csh syntax). > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/ > Ok, I understand that you don't have to execute both lang.sh or lang.csh; they are executed depending on the shell you have, there is no need to run both, in fact they do the same. Default shell will suffice and is better for porting scripts. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple