Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: zsh: no matches found
- X-seq: zsh-users 8624
- From: Wayne Davison <wayned@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Toshiro <toshiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: zsh: no matches found
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:45:38 -0800
- Cc: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <200503202304.44332.toshiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <200503202238.31745.toshiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050321004759.GC5243@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200503202304.44332.toshiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 11:04:44PM -0200, Toshiro wrote:
> Is this the only way? In other shells this is implemented in a very
> simple way, if the wildcard can be expanded, then it is expanded,
> otherwise an asterisk is sent as an argument to the application.
Yes, other shells do it that way, but that has its downsides. For
instance, if you run "touch *,c" it's better to get "no match" rather
than creating a useless *,c file. Or if you type a command like this:
"rsync -avP *.html *.shmtl *.php host:/dest/" (note the misspelling),
it is better to get a "no match" error right away than to get a single
open-error embedded in all the output that you then have to figure out
at the end of the transfer. I much prefer to simply put single quotes
around any wild-carded file names that should not be expanded rather
than to configure the shell to include a wildcard that didn't match
anything. YMMV, of course, but if you give it a try, you may find that
you come to prefer it as well.
..wayne..
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author