chet@odin.INS.CWRU.Edu (Chet Ramey) (01/10/91)
In article <316@audfax.audiofax.com> arnold@audiofax.com (Arnold Robbins) writes: >I am pretty sure that all of these were in the System III sh. > redirection of input/output for builtins (e.g. `read x < /dev/tty') This did not appear until V.2. The V.2 sh manual has a sentence to the effect that `now you can do redirection with builtins'. Another thing new with the V.2 shell that I forgot to mention is the source conversion from `Bournegol' to C. Chet -- Chet Ramey ``There's just no surf in Network Services Group Cleveland, U.S.A. ...'' Case Western Reserve University chet@ins.CWRU.Edu My opinions are just those, and mine alone.
arnold@audiofax.com (Arnold Robbins) (01/11/91)
In article <1991Jan9.215829.9890@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> chet@po.CWRU.Edu writes: >Another thing new with the V.2 shell that I forgot to mention is the source >conversion from `Bournegol' to C. And, boy, did it make a difference! A quantum leap in readability and maintainability (and therefore modifiability) of the shell. It seems to me that at about V.2 AT&T got serious, and went through *everything*, formatting the C code, regularizing argument parsing via getopt, and so on. I think it's pretty fair to say that AT&T concentrated on the user-level stuff through V.2, while UCB concentrated on the kernel level stuff through 4.3. -- Arnold Robbins AudioFAX, Inc. | Laundry increases 2000 Powers Ferry Road, #200 / Marietta, GA. 30067 | exponentially in the INTERNET: arnold@audiofax.com Phone: +1 404 933 7612 | number of children. UUCP: emory!audfax!arnold Fax-box: +1 404 618 4581 | -- Miriam Robbins
meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) (01/11/91)
In article <317@audfax.audiofax.com> arnold@audiofax.com (Arnold Robbins) writes: | In article <1991Jan9.215829.9890@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> chet@po.CWRU.Edu writes: | >Another thing new with the V.2 shell that I forgot to mention is the source | >conversion from `Bournegol' to C. | | And, boy, did it make a difference! A quantum leap in readability and | maintainability (and therefore modifiability) of the shell. It seems to me | that at about V.2 AT&T got serious, and went through *everything*, formatting | the C code, regularizing argument parsing via getopt, and so on. I seem to remember that people were saying that the C version of the shell was much faster in doing shell scripts then the Bournegol version, though I suspect the real win was caused by not exec-ing test and echo. My .profile seems to do a zillion if's and such, and it was MUCH faster using a modern shell (System V.2 /bin/sh, ksh, or bash) than the tired old V7 shell (which Ultrix shipped as /bin/sh). -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 Considering the flames and intolerance, shouldn't USENET be spelled ABUSENET?
boyd@necisa.ho.necisa.oz.au (Boyd Roberts) (01/11/91)
In article <1991Jan9.215829.9890@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> chet@po.CWRU.Edu writes: > >Another thing new with the V.2 shell that I forgot to mention is the source >conversion from `Bournegol' to C. > You mean `shellgol'. Boyd Roberts boyd@necisa.ho.necisa.oz.au ``When the going gets wierd, the weird turn pro...''