Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > It seems like this isn't the last time we are going to have a > problem with string replacement like this, and having a well-defined > helper would go far. I think the idea of [10/10] is to use shell itself as a well-defined helper, with "string replacement" being "$variable_interpolation". Which isn't a bad approach, I would say. > The rest of the changes to the test script seem more complicated > than necessary for what _should_ be a simple problem. True. I am not sure which parts are unnecessary "churn while at it, burying the most interesting and beneficial one at the end as a hostage", and which ones are absolutely needed to reach [10/10]. Perhaps all of them are the latter? I dunno.
