Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: math, percentage
- X-seq: zsh-users 9807
- From: "Brian K. White" <brian@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: math, percentage
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 23:43:54 -0500
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- Organization: Aljex Software
- References: <024d01c60dd7$576ed990$931fa8c0@venti> <20051231072500.GJ39217@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <00df01c60e4a$fb8d2d60$931fa8c0@venti> <488030720601041505g7a9aee72nc8ebcf1bde13b3a4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Reese" <john.reese@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Brian K. White" <brian@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: math, percentage
Nice.
Never knew you could do the assignment inside the braces like that,
but even so I should have thought to at least try tp=$((t*100/T)) since I
use n=$((n+1)) a hundred times a day.
thanks
Brian K. White -- brian@xxxxxxxxx -- http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
You could do
((n++))
instead and save three hundred characters a day.
----
Ah, neat. :)
It should be noted though:
Up to to this point the examples also work in ksh88 ,the version of ksh
still shipping stock with many commercial unii as /bin/ksh.
((n++)) does not work in ksh88.
It does work in ksh93, bash, pdksh, and of course zsh.
Most of my fancier scripts need to explicitly call a particular shell anways
because of special features, so this is useful.
Brian K. White -- brian@xxxxxxxxx -- http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!
-----
<off topic here but it should be explained why ksh93 doesn't obviate ksh88
and thereby the portability comment>
The existence and availability of ksh93 for most platforms, even though it
even ships stock with a few very recent ones (but still not as /bin/ksh),
must not be considered as the simple answer for anything that doesn't work
in ksh88 though because it's a bit buggy on some systems and cannot be used
as the drop in replacement for the stock sh or ksh or as roots or even a
users login shell. Ask me how I know. :) It seems ok at first but after a
few days in production with a couple hundred users you realize you are
having a lot of scattered problems you didn't used to have, and putting the
old binary back ends the trend.
It's useful enough though to install it somewhere and call it explicitly on
the bang line. My biggest item about ksh93 lately is that it has a built-in
sleep that takes floating point values. I have things that really do want a
"sleep .1", and anything that wants that, by definition also really wants it
built-in, not to fork a child and load an executable every time. No other
shell anywhere has that that I've found. (hint!)
Perl has nap() and probably other popular non bourne scripting languages
have some form of usleep or sleep .xx but heck, so what? So does C.
Also there is:
VARS="look at all these assignments woohoo read is cool how many lines
of code would this be without it I ask you montoyo inigra"
grep "^${LOGNAME}:" /path/to/userdefs | IFS=: read junk $VARS
export $VARS
echo $woohoo
The bugginess of ksh93 on the system above is at least partly due to the
at&t build system for ksh that is such a pain in the ___ that hardly anyone
even attempts to build it, and fewer succeed. For SCO Open Server 5.x.x and
lower, there is exactly one binary out there, made by one guy a few years
ago, and it's a little buggy, and he knew it all along, and he's not
attempting to play with it again. I tried but ran into problems that I
couldn't debug because the convoluted build system hid and buried the real
problem too well and I actually have a job that doesn't allow me a couple of
solid weeks just to build a new shell. :) So it's possible that ksh93 itself
is fine and merely it's difficult to do a thorough job of porting it. Either
way, it still means you can't count on it.
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author