Timeline for Why is $'\0' the same as ''?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2013 at 1:33 | answer | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 16:15 | comment | added | slhck | @ChandraRavoori In that case, use find … -exec sh -c '…' {} ';'. Here, within sh -c you can call the file as the argument and even use multiple lines. See Gilles' answer here for more: unix.stackexchange.com/a/9500/5893 | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 16:13 | comment | added | iruvar | @slhck, thanks. What about situations involving multi-step operations on each file where a loop may be preferable for readability reasons? Is there a better loop option than the "naïve way" above? | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 16:06 | comment | added | slhck | @ChandraRavoori Yes, for example by using find … -exec instead of looping around files, which works for most cases where you'd use such a for loop instead. Here, find takes care of everything for you. | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 16:04 | comment | added | slhck | @htor I know for i in $(ls) is terribly stupid—I'm almost ashamed I used it as a bad example here. | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 16:01 | comment | added | user13742 | By the way if you want to do safe operations iterating over a set of files - use for f in * instead of parsing ls. | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 15:44 | comment | added | iruvar | Referring to the "naïve" way, is there a better way of doing this? | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 10:03 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackUnix/status/290036184833478656 | ||
| Jan 12, 2013 at 9:08 | vote | accept | slhck | ||
| Jan 12, 2013 at 8:25 | answer | added | michas | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jan 12, 2013 at 8:15 | history | asked | slhck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |