discuss: BASH programming
Subject:
Re: BASH programming
From:
Mark Garboden ####@####.####
Date:
13 Jan 2004 23:17:35 -0000
Message-Id: <40047C4E.30900@ourwebhome.org>
I was just thinking this morning that I should read up on bash.
So I am volunteering to do technical and/or grammar reviews when you are
ready.
Mark
Jeremy Heilman wrote:
>Dear TLDP Discuss-ers,
>
>I'd like to propose to y'all that I be allowed to assume authorship
>responsibilities of the BASH Programming-Introduction HOWTO. The
>current HOWTO was last revised in 2000, and while BASH commands haven't
>changed all that much (certainly not on the introductory command level),
>I have encountered additional useful information, both in reading other
>sources and trying things myself, whose addition would make a more
>comprehensive resource. I had considered creating a document of my own,
>but given the wide spread popularity (and want for updating) of the Bash
>HOWTO, I believe a new revision would be more beneficial to the Linux
>community..
>
>I tried email the current listed author - Mike G ####@####.####
>- and got a non-existant email address bounce in reply. I'm guessing
>that the document has lapsed into unmaintained status. A google search
>revealed a million references to the HOWTO itself, but none of the
>author's current whereabouts. In lieu of talking to the author it
>seemed like the next logical step would be to contact the TLDP community
>for their input.
>
>I propose the inclusion of more down-to-earth explanations of many of
>the structures, as I assume the audience will have some programming
>knowledge and is interested more in how to turn abstract programming
>ideas into real Bash scripts. I would do some restructuring of the
>current document, mostly shuffling of information here-and-there to put
>it in better context. I think including a chapter that points out which
>functions are intrinsic to Bash and which are actually external programs
>would be helpful in making things more platform independent. I'd also
>like to include more general syntax of common structures prior to the
>examples already contained. The doc could benefit from taking advantage
>of some of DocBook's shading, layout, and typesetting features as well.
>I have tons of other, ancillary ideas, but I'll save those for later!
>
>I'd enjoy hearing any feedback any of you might have.
>
>Regards,
>-Jeremy Heilman
>Case Western Reserve University
>Cleveland, Ohio, USA
>
>
>
