Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:44:11 -0800 From: Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: perl substitution question Message-ID: <20070114214410.GB24039@thought.org> In-Reply-To: <20070114203104.GB3404@kobe.laptop> References: <20070114024551.GA21847@thought.org> <20070114034148.GC2734@kobe.laptop> <20070114201546.GA28048@thought.org> <20070114203104.GB3404@kobe.laptop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 14, 2007 at 10:31:04PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2007-01-14 12:15, Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org> wrote:
> > Thanks for all the ways, gents. (I never thought of tr, but now that
> > seems like an option.) A week+ ago I tried perl using 's/\xNN/"/g'
> > from the cmdline, but nojoy. The online docs said that \N{xx} would
> > catch a hex character; that's what was fuzzy.
>
> Watch out for shells with funny 'expansion rules', like csh(1) :)
>
> Even in sh(1) variants, it's always a good idea to save the Perl script
> in a file first, and test it independently of the shell, with:
>
> perl filter.pl < infile > outfile
>
> To avoid all the messy details about single-quotes, double-quotes,
> backquotes, stars, dollars, etc :)
>
Man! truer words, (&c)... . One o the very few suggestions
left for improving shells [ and/or subshells ] is a flag,
say '-N' which would have *nothing* to be escaped. In other
words a '$' or '"' would be interpreted literally. But I'm
sure there are reasons for not escaping some bytes.
--
Gary Kline kline@thought.org www.thought.org Public Service Unix
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070114214410.GB24039>