Re: RFC: major change to argument processing.

[Marius Vollmer]

Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:

> Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> I think the code should be pretty easy to follow, though.  I did have
> to add more code to handle unexpected eof's *everywhere*,

I think I also treat eofs everywhere, no?

> and I tried to avoid any "reversing" (though there was no really
> good reason for that since performance doesn't really matter here).

Instead of reversing, you recurse.  I'd say that this is actually
worse than reversing... ;>

> In any case, I'd be happy to use code more like yours if you'd
> prefer that, but here's what I currently have:

Whichever you like better.  I don't think there is any difference
between the two, except that you rely on left-to-right evaluation when
recursing (which you shouldn't do) and that you return an empty string
at eof, which might be better flagged by the the-eof-object.  I use
`eq?' to compare characters, but I should really be using `char=?'.

The original code in script.c also does backslash expansion, as I
noticed now.  That is, "\n" is replaced by linefeed, etc.  The shell
doesn't do this, and we shouldn't either, I think.