[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: more m4 underquotations

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: more m4 underquotations
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:25:49 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

* Jim Meyering wrote on Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 11:34:45PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > OK to apply?

> Please do apply them.

Thanks, I did applied the unlink*.m4 changes.

* Bruno Haible wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 12:18:11AM CET:
> There is an important property that programming languages should have:
> the ability to copy and paste a piece of code from one place to another.
> changequote does have this property to a large extent: You can move a piece
> of code that uses changequote between an "unquoted" context and a
> "single-quoted" context without modifications, and you can also copy/paste
> to a shell if you remove the (easily visible) changequote lines and comment
> lines.

Hmm.  You shouldn't have hardly any shell text in an "unquoted" context.
But ok.

> Quadrigraphs don't have this property as much: You can move a piece of code
> between an "unquoted" context, a "single-quoted" context or a "doubly-quoted"
> context without modifications. But no easy copy/paste to a shell.

Well, to some extent.  You remove the changequote lines, or you sed
the quadrigraphs.  Mechanically, both is easy, the former ones are
a bit easier to spot by the eye.

But inserting a macro call into a changequote'd region, can't happen
to you with quadrigraphs.

> [[...]] doesn't have this property at all.

Yes.  Maximal quoting (double-quoting all literal text) does, though.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]