Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Johannes Sixt wrote: >> >> seq is not universally available. Can we have that as >> >> for i in 0 1 2 3 4; do >> for j in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9; do >> > sub/file-$i$j >> echo file-$i$j >> expected >> done >> done > > Or as > > i=1 > while test $i -le 50 > do > num=$(printf %04d $i) > > sub/file-$num > echo file-$num >> expected > i=$(($i+1)) > done > > This version should be as portable, Huh? It uses the conceivably-not-builtin "test" (something which _you_ picked as something to complain about in a patch of mine where it was not used in an inner loop) on every iteration, it uses printf and it uses $((...)) arithmetic expansion. Whereas the proposal by Johannes works fine even on prehistoric shell versions. So the "as portable" enough moniker is surely weird. > with the benefit that it is easier to change for different start and > end values. Correct. But why would we want those here? -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
