Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] dir_iterator: add tests for dir_iterator API
- From
Daniel Ferreira (theiostream) <bnmvco@gmail.com>
- Date
- Mar 30, 2017, 18:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAEA2_RL18TarW6k5keP+ADFDv+VZE+gG3e6EkCmWby7GjG-T_w@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ab7a326c-0189-4542-76e8-649eb6e804c9@alum.mit.edu>
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:46 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Is there a special reason to write the date to the file as opposed to, say > > touch dir/b > > ? (Some people use `: >dir/b` for this purpose, though I've never found > out why.) If you write the date to the file, the reader will be > distracted unnecessarily wondering whether the contents are important to > the test. >
There's no reason. They will be `touch`ed instead of written in a next version.
`:` is a bash builtin that that returns an exit code of zero and produces no output. On my Mac at least:
bash-3.2$ type : : is a shell builtin bash-3.2$ type touch touch is /usr/bin/touch
I suppose there are reasons to try to keep the most of a shell script's logic within the shell itself, without involving external binaries.