Questions about windows support

[Juan Manuel Cabo]

I think that the "for x in *" still gets you on the limit (not sure).

This is how you deal with spaces in filenames or '-'

   find -print0 | xargs -0 rm

Another funny unix thing is awk... it solves all your problems but
in one line, but then creates new ones until you get them right
for separators and special cases.

--jm


On 02/21/2012 12:31 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 04:24:44AM +0100, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 21 February 2012 at 03:13:10 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>> for x in *; mv $x dest/$x; done
>>>
>>> Easy. :)
>>
>> And wrong!
>>
>> What if the filename has a space in it? You can say "$x", with quotes,
>> to handle that.
> 
> Argh, you're right. That's one reason I *hate* the implicit
> interpolation that shells have the tendency to do. Perl got it right: $x
> means the value of x as a *single* value, no secret additional
> interpolation, no multiple layers of re-interpretation, and that
> nonsense.
> 
> 
>> But, worse yet... a leading dash? Another downside with the shell
>> expansion is the program can't tell if that is an expanded filename or
>> a user option.
> 
> Heh. Never thought of this before. I can see some fun times to be had
> with it, though!
> 
> But you could probably handle it by:
> 
> 	mv -- "$x" "$dest/$x"
> 
> 
>> In this case, the mv simply wouldn't work, but you can get some
>> bizarre behavior out of that if you wanted to play with it.
>>
>> try this some day as a joke:
>>
>> $ mkdir evil-unix # toy directory
>> $ cd evil-unix
>> $ touch -- -l # our lol file
>> $ touch cool # just to put a file in there
>> $ ls
>> -l  cool
>> $ ls * # the lol file is interpreted as an option!
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 me users 0 2012-02-20 22:18 cool
>> $
>>
>>
>> imagine the poor newb trying to understand that!
> 
> +1, LOL.
> 
> 
> T
>