Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add test case for ls-files --with-head

From: David Kastrup <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:52:48 +0200

Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> 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