Re: [bug-gawk] in-place edit request

[Ed Morton]

Andy -

On 12/31/2012 10:40 AM, Andrew J. Schorr wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 09:03:14AM -0600, Ed Morton wrote:
> > I understand from this email exchange that -i is being used by gawk
> > for something else (though I don't see it mentioned at
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/manual/gawk.html#Options so I'm not
> > sure what) so I assume that -i , unfortunately, is off the table (is
> > it?) but is it really not possible to use "-<capital-i>" or some
> > other single character so we can have:
> >
> >      sed -i 'script' file
> >      perl -i 'script' file
> >      ruby -i 'script' file
> >      awk -I 'script' file
> >
> > Right now the chosen implementation is driving the interface.
> > Couldn't we retain that implementation but also provide the
> > interface the users would expect even if it means a little more code
> > internally to map "-I" to the "-i inplace" functionality?
> If we use an gawk command-line option, then we need to incorporate
> the functionality inside gawk instead of implementing it as an
> extension.

This "extension" stuff - where can I find out more about it? I found 
http://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/manual/gawk.html#Dynamic-Extensions but it 
doesn't mention "-i" so I'm not sure if that's the right "extension"s we're 
talking about.

Would users need to compile gawk in some specific way (or otherwise have to do 
something they don't normally do) to be able to use the in place editing 
functionality if it was provided by "extension"s or would we just get it for no 
additional effort when we download the gawk version that has it? I get my gawk 
from cygwin or from our IT guys at work just installing the latest version 
occasionally, I never have to compile it myself.

> > > There is nothing stopping anyone from writing a one line wrapper:
> > >
> > >         $ cat aip       # Awk In Place
> > >         #! /bin/sh
> > >         exec gawk -i inplace "$@"
> Or one could name this script "gawki" if you'd like.  Or gawk-i.
>
> Is it really worth bringing this feature into the main binary for the
> sake of having a space between "gawk" and "-i"?
Not sure I understand the question. We're discussing the difference to the user 
between "gawk -i inplace" and "gawk -I" (or similar) not the difference between 
"gawk -i" and "gawki".

     Ed.