Mail Archives: djgpp/2003/02/08/03:45:26
<abc AT anchorageinternet DOT org> wrote in message
news:200302080732 DOT h187W4Wu013299 AT en26 DOT groggy DOT anc DOT acsalaska DOT net...
> this is very wrong - i was up to long dealing with a problem
> related to this - and i had no business thinking ...
> or doing email.
>
> --
>
> 1. note that all references you provided, and 20 others i've read,
state:
> script starting with a line of the form "#! interpreter [arg]".
>
What this means is that the first line of the script (i.e.,
the "starting" line of the script) is of the form:
#! interpreter [arg]
That is, only one interpreter and one, optional, arg.
> emphasis on "starting" - it does not say that there must (or
should),
> not be any more to the line before the end of the line. it
could've
> been written to say:
>
> "script containing a line of the form ..." or
> "script consisting of a line of the form ..." or
> "script with a line of the form ...", etc.
>
> but it wasn't written that way. all man pages say "starting" ...
No, they say "script starting with a line ..." NOT "a line
starting with ...", which is a different thing altogether.
> i don't think the word was used frivolously, i think it was used
> intentionally, for a reason.
HTH
--
Peter S Tillier
"Who needs perl when you can write dc and sokoban in sed?"
- Raw text -