A
B
C
D
E
---------
How can I decide the range?

Thank you

ST

As there is no shell arithmetic in csh, you have to revert to
while(...)-loops and use the expr command to increment the counter.

See also http://www.primate.wisc.edu/software/csh-tcsh-book/csh-whynot

Ronald
--
Do NOT reply to the address given in the From: header. If you want to
reply by mail, use the following address (after deleting the XXX):
Ronald Otto Valentin Fischer <rovf...@earthling.net>
(Tired of getting spam after posting a message? http://www.deadspam.com)

Yes, csh has shell arithmetic using the "@" command.  If you just want
to display numbers from 65 to 69, you can do this:

    @ a = 65
    while ( $a <= 69 )
        echo $a
        @ a ++
    end

Converting the number 65 to the character 'A' is another issue.  I
don't think there's a builtin way to do this in csh, or in any other
shell I'm familiar with.

A trifle overstated IMHO, but good reading.  My personal feeling is
that any script too complex for csh is better done in Perl.  YMMV, of
course.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.

  >> See also http://www.primate.wisc.edu/software/csh-tcsh-book/csh-whynot

  kt> A trifle overstated IMHO, but good reading.  My personal feeling
  kt> is that any script too complex for csh is better done in Perl.
  kt> YMMV, of course.

Really?  So, you think this:

  mycommand 2>/tmp/mycommand.errors

is better done in Perl?

;)

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <psm...@baynetworks.com>    HASMAT--HA Software Methods & Tools
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.

Some shells have printf.  I don't know if csh does, or if it's an
external command.  Of course, you could pipe it to
awk '{printf "%c\n",$1}'

RL (ridante laute)

printf is an external command, but it treats %c argument
as a string (picks its first letter), so it won't help here:

% printf "%c\n" 65                                        
6

Yes, that works, and is probably the easiest portable way.

With ksh it can be done without external commands like this:

typeset -i8 x=65
eval "print '\\0${x#*#}'"

I have no idea how to do it with csh (other than by brute force).

--
Tapani Tarvainen

But it isn't csh either (it is Posix shell syntax).

BTW: If you find an easy way in csh to redirect stderr and stdout to
different files, let me know.

The point is not that some individual command is easier in csh than in
Perl, but the combination of the commands, i.e. programming logic, is
usually easier in Perl than in most shells, except for trivial examples
where you only want to execute, say, a few commands in sequence, maybe
passing parameters. But if you start to enhance your script with, say,
command line switches, it is far more convenient doing it in Perl.

Ronald
--
Do NOT reply to the address given in the From: header. If you want to
reply by mail, use the following address (after deleting the XXX):
Ronald Otto Valentin Fischer <rovf...@earthling.net>
(Tired of getting spam after posting a message? http://www.deadspam.com)

It is an external command. See

   man printf
--
Do NOT reply to the address given in the From: header. If you want to
reply by mail, use the following address (after deleting the XXX):
Ronald Otto Valentin Fischer <rovf...@earthling.net>
(Tired of getting spam after posting a message? http://www.deadspam.com)

Sorry Keith, you are perfectly right!

I turned away from csh programming so early that I forgot about its
arithmetic capability ;-)

Ronald
--
Do NOT reply to the address given in the From: header. If you want to
reply by mail, use the following address (after deleting the XXX):
Ronald Otto Valentin Fischer <rovf...@earthling.net>
(Tired of getting spam after posting a message? http://www.deadspam.com)

  ronny> "Paul D. Smith" <psm...@baynetworks.com> writes:

  >> Really?  So, you think this:
  >>
  >> mycommand 2>/tmp/mycommand.errors
  >>
  >> is better done in Perl?

  ronny> But it isn't csh either (it is Posix shell syntax).

I know.  But it's too complex to write in csh so I wrote it in Bourne :).

  ronny> BTW: If you find an easy way in csh to redirect stderr and
  ronny> stdout to different files, let me know.

Yes, this is entirely my point.

You said that "any script too complex for csh is better done in Perl".
I'm just pointing out even something as completely trivial as
redirecting stderr is "too complex for csh", so you must feel that any
command line or script that requires redirection of stderr "is better
done in Perl".

I dunno 'bout anyone else, but I find that _very_ hard to accept ;).

PS. There are at least two ways I know of to do it in csh; one will only
    work sending stdout to the terminal and is marginally obscure, and
    the other will allow you to pipe or redirect stdout separately _but_
    is *seriously* obscure and requires the mkfifo command...

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <psm...@baynetworks.com>    HASMAT--HA Software Methods & Tools
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.

Um, no, not really.  My statement apparently wasn't quite vague enough.

BTW, the above can be done pretty easily in csh:

   sh -c "mycommand 2>/tmp/mycommand.errors"

8-)}

More seriously, since I use tcsh for interactive work, I tend to use
csh for some *small* scripts, particularly one-shot scripts that I
won't be maintaining.  My personal experience has been that *most* csh
scripts that become too complex are better done in Perl than in sh --
but that's largely because I'm more familiar with Perl than with sh.

I've gotten more familiar with sh recently, and I do find myself using
it for some scripts.

If I'm still overlooking anything, please squint and re-read the above
until it makes sense.  8-)}

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.

But then you might as well do the whole thing in awk (or Perl).

Ok, I'll explain mine if you'll explain yours.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.

This seems to work:

% cat foo
#!/bin/sh

echo This is stdout
echo This is stderr 1>&2
% ( ./foo > foo.out ) >& foo.err
% cat foo.out
This is stdout
% cat foo.err
This is stderr
% exit

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.

Most shell scripts do most of their work by invoking external
programs.  /bin/sh is almost universally available, and can be invoked
from a csh script as easily as any other utility.

sh -c 'foo 1>&2'
sh -c 'foo 2>/dev/null'

Ok, I'm not seriously suggesting that this is a good idea in a script;
if you need this kind of capability, it's probably better to write the
whole script using sh.  But if you use csh or tcsh *interactively*
(and IMHO there are valid reasons for doing so), "sh -c '...'" is a
handy idiom for those cases where you want finer control over I/O
redirection than csh provides natively.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) k...@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Cxiuj via bazo apartenas ni.