![]() |
Hello and Welcome from United States to the UNIX and Linux Forums! Thank You for Visiting and Joining Our Global Community.
|
|
google unix.com
|
|||||||
| Forums | Register | Forum Rules | Links | Albums | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Shell Programming and Scripting Post questions about KSH, CSH, SH, BASH, PERL, PHP, SED, AWK and OTHER shell scripts and shell scripting languages here. |
More UNIX and Linux Forum Topics You Might Find Helpful
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| How to find the last argument in a argument line? | nehagupta2008 | UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers | 4 | 06-20-2008 11:05 AM |
| option followed by : taking next option if argument missing with getopts | gurukottur | Shell Programming and Scripting | 2 | 03-17-2008 12:46 PM |
| Argument list too long - Shell error | dad5119 | Shell Programming and Scripting | 8 | 03-03-2006 03:57 PM |
| getopts | yerra | Shell Programming and Scripting | 5 | 03-26-2005 10:43 AM |
| command find returned bash: /usr/bin/find: Argument list too long | yacsil | Shell Programming and Scripting | 1 | 12-15-2003 06:38 PM |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
||||
|
getopts and a list argument
Hi,
I'm using bash and ksh93 compatible derivatives. In a recent getopts experience, I found myself spending far too much time on this little problem. I hope someone can help... So here's the deal. I want to build have a command line interface that accepts either zero, one, or many parameters of the same type. Assume the script sends e-mails to a recipient list. I tried to write the code to handle this, but it did not work: commandname -r "user1@tld user2@tld user3@tld" This did not work because the getopts seemed to parse strings using space as delimiter regardless of the existence of the surrounding double or single quotes. This resulted in OPTARGS containing only the first element of the list. (e.g. user1@tld) So, I changed the UI to be such that any number (0, 1, or more) of the -r options can be on the command line. commandname -r user1@tld -r user2@tld -r user3@tld Now, my getopts loop has this form: Code:
while getopts "r:" opt; do
case $opt in
r) ONE_STRING="${OPTARG}"
;;
esac
STRING_LIST="${STRING_LIST} ${ONE_STRING}"
done
command line. I created the variable, STRING_LIST, to "accumulate" the strings. Is there a better way to do this style of zero, one, or more options of the same type? Is there a better way to build a list that does not create anomalies such as a space character at the beginning or end. (My example above has a single space character as the 1st character of STRING_LIST, due to fact it is an empty variable the first time it is referenced on the RHS of the = sign.) ##### BTW, I am unable change tools or languages so if you want to suggest that I use Perl or Ruby or even Java, then please include a example code (for others to see) otherwise why bother acting like a smarty pants if you can't display a nice example? ![]() |
|
||||
|
With Bash v2 and v3 I get:
Code:
showGetopts() { while getopts "a:b:c:" opt; do case "${opt}" in a|b|c) echo "${opt}: \"${OPTARG}\"";; esac; done; }; showGetopts -a "a@b c@d" -b e@f g@h -c 1 23 4
a: "a@b c@d"
b: "e@f"
|
|
||||
|
I found my bug. I was mucking up command line data before getopts
even had a chance to get a whack at it! Do'h! <Sheepishly> It was caused by something I was not showing. Ugh. My "main" was calling a function "process_command_line()" where this getopts work was being performed. I was calling it this way: process_command_line $@ I really thought I was doing it correctly by using $@ instead of $*. Though, not entirely. Evidently, that variable needs to be double quoted, to get the expected behavior. Like this: process_command_line "$@" I wonder why that is? What was I breaking? Thanks for the feedback! I'm glad I got straightened out now so that I could avoid writing additional (and unnecessary) code to work around my bug. ![]() Hmmm... This makes me wonder if %SOME_LARGE_PERCENTAGE% of the existing code base in the world is a workaround for what the programmer did not understand. ![]() Cheers ![]() |
|
||||
|
The easiest way is make one function "old" style, one "new" style, 'set -vx', then compare output.
I don't know the answer to that, but one example I can think of was KDE vs QT. In the past the KDE team did a lot of odd tweakage instead of using QT to its fullest. That changed though. Even if a programmer understands it all there's bound to be hundreds of ways to do something "better" (more efficient, more performant). Wrt scripting reading static guides like the ABS (again), reading fora like these and other peoples scripts helps, the rest is experimenting and "just" gaining experience. And as F/OSS shows, if things can be improved they will be. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|