Re: S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- From: Adam Funk <a24061@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 20:42:07 +0100
On 2010-05-26, chuckcar wrote:
Adam Funk <a24061@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:lq80d7xufi.ln2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
I've used neither recently. Midnight commander's may not be unix purism,LOL. It's a stream editor. The same as a text editor, but it doesn't
use user input, it's batch run.
Aren't the sed commands based on the ed keybindings? (Not that I've
used ed much, nor am I a sed expert, but that's what I've heard.)
but it's far easier. I *have* written sed scripts quite a while back,
but found the program had a strange logic - if I could even call it
that.
I have to admit, I've never learnt sed or awk because perl (which does
both kinds of things, and more, although probably in ways that make
sed- and awk-enthusiasts cringe) was available when I reached the
point of needing things like this.
--
Bob just used 'canonical' in the canonical way. [Guy Steele]
.
- References:
- Re: S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- From: chuckcar
- Re: S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- Prev by Date: Re: S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- Previous by thread: Re: ? S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- Next by thread: Re: S-Lang is more of a virtual machine than sed, I think.
- Index(es):