Re: .ONESHELL enhancement?

Matt McCutchen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnu.make.devel
Message-ID <1253716640.2392.91.camel@localhost>
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 08:48 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> The reference to the "advantage of performance" is a strong hint; you
> can't compare two techniques for performance unless they do pretty
> much the same thing.

I disagree.  To compare two techniques for performance, they must be
interchangeable in some context, but there certainly doesn't need to be
an automatic semantic-preserving conversion from one to the other.  For
example, people compare performance of Apache's mod_proxy and mod_jk:

http://anilsaldhana.blogspot.com/2006/04/modjk-versus-modproxy.html

> Similarly, it seems clear to me anyway that the
> "lack of requirement for many continued lines" simply means that it's
> nice to not have to type (and see) a literal &&\ at the end of each
> line.

I disagree.  As I read it, the sentence is comparing the multi-shell and
single-shell methods and is implying that the "lack of a requirement for
many continued lines" is an advantage of the latter over the former.

> BTW, can you give an example of a whose semantics would be changed by
> adding &&, such that {} or () is needed? Seems to me that the
> precedence rules make this safe

false
true || echo bar

-- 
Matt
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.