| 1 |
On 12/13/19 2:12 PM, Michael 'veremitz' Everitt wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 13/12/19 20:36, Michał Górny wrote [excerpted]: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> Is this really an argument for or *against* it? Developers are entirely |
| 5 |
>> capable of keeping seds that do nothing for years, as well as patches |
| 6 |
>> that -- while apparently applying correctly -- are entirely meaningless. |
| 7 |
> <snip> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I think there is some merit in some kind of feedback when sed's are doing |
| 10 |
> nothing, although how feasible it is to generate any useful feedback I |
| 11 |
> can't say. I wouldn't say it needs to explicitly fail or make lots of |
| 12 |
> noise, just an info message that could prompt some further investigation. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It's possible to implement a sed wrapper that detects file arguments for |
| 16 |
-i/--in-place mode, and compares file content before and after the sed call. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
There are also ways to make sed exit with an error but that won't be as |
| 19 |
easy to use as a sed wrapper: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15965073/return-code-of-sed-for-no-match/15966279 |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Thanks, |
| 24 |
Zac |
Archives