sh-script mode does not understand printf

sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Peter Dyballa]

This bug report will be sent to the Free Software Foundation,
not to your local site managers!
Please write in English, because the Emacs maintainers do not have
translators to read other languages for them.

Your bug report will be posted to the bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org mailing list,
and to the gnu.emacs.bug news group.

In GNU Emacs 21.1.1 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8, X toolkit, Xaw3d scroll bars)
 of 2001-12-02 on solaris
Important settings:
  value of $LC_ALL: nil
  value of $LC_COLLATE: nil
  value of $LC_CTYPE: nil
  value of $LC_MESSAGES: nil
  value of $LC_MONETARY: nil
  value of $LC_NUMERIC: nil
  value of $LC_TIME: nil
  value of $LANG: de_DE.ISO8859-15@euro
  locale-coding-system: iso-latin-9
  default-enable-multibyte-characters: nil

Please describe exactly what actions triggered the bug
and the precise symptoms of the bug:

In Shell-script mode printf is not highlighted as part of shell syntax. 
Printf is a powerful successor to the various echo variants.


Recent input:
<next> C-x k <return> <home> > > > > > > f <next> C-x
k <return> <down> <down> <down> <down> <down> f <next>
C-x k <return> > > > > > > > <down> f <next> <next>
<next> <down> <down> <up> e <next> <next> <next> <next>
<next> <next> C-l <next> <down-mouse-1> <mouse-1> <next>
C-s e c h o <return> <next> <down-mouse-1> <mouse-1>
SPC " p r i n f " <left> <left> t <print> C-x d <return>
g B y <help-echo> <help-echo> <help-echo> <help-echo>
<help-echo> v q <up> v <home> <next> <home> <help-echo>
<help-echo> <help-echo> <help-echo> <help-echo> <menu-bar>
<help-menu> <report-emacs-bug>

Recent messages:
Compiling /usr/local/share/emacs/21.1/lisp/progmodes/sh-script.el... 
(sh-canonicalize-shell)
Loading easy-mmode...done
Compiling /usr/local/share/emacs/21.1/lisp/progmodes/sh-script.el... 
(sh-mkword-regexpr)
Loading derived...done
Compiling /usr/local/share/emacs/21.1/lisp/progmodes/sh-script.el...done
Wrote /usr/local/share/emacs/21.1/lisp/progmodes/sh-script.elc
Byte-Compile: 1 file.
Type C-h for help, h for commands, q to quit. [2 times]
Mark set [2 times]
Loading emacsbug...done

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Pete                                            Nols GES AG
                                                Gervinusstraße 18-22
(Peter Dyballa)         069-92024·795           60322 Frankfurt am Main

Re: sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Glenn Morris]

Peter Dyballa wrote:

> In Shell-script mode printf is not highlighted as part of shell
> syntax. Printf is a powerful successor to the various echo variants.

Thanks - the CVS version of Emacs already knows about printf, for the
bash shell. Not all shells have printf as a builtin, for example
(t)csh does not. If you were thinking of a different shell with a
builtin printf, please say which.

Re: sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Kevin Rodgers]

Glenn Morris wrote:

> Thanks - the CVS version of Emacs already knows about printf, for the
> bash shell. Not all shells have printf as a builtin, for example
> (t)csh does not. If you were thinking of a different shell with a
> builtin printf, please say which.


Right:


# /bin/ksh88 -c "type printf"

printf is /usr/bin/printf
# /bin/ksh93 -c "type printf"
printf is a shell builtin

-- 
Kevin Rodgers

Re: sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Glenn Morris]

Kevin Rodgers wrote:

> # /bin/ksh88 -c "type printf"
>
> printf is /usr/bin/printf
> # /bin/ksh93 -c "type printf"
> printf is a shell builtin

That's an awkward one, because (AFAICS) sh-script.el doesn't know
anything about ksh93. "ksh" is assumed to be ksh88. Do you think ksh88
and ksh93 differ significantly enough for it to be worth adding code
for ksh93 to sh-script? Is "ksh" these days more likely to be ksh88 or
ksh93?

Re: sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Kevin Rodgers]

Glenn Morris wrote:

> Kevin Rodgers wrote:
> 
>># /bin/ksh88 -c "type printf"
>>printf is /usr/bin/printf
>># /bin/ksh93 -c "type printf"
>>printf is a shell builtin
>>
> 
> That's an awkward one, because (AFAICS) sh-script.el doesn't know
> anything about ksh93. "ksh" is assumed to be ksh88. Do you think ksh88
> and ksh93 differ significantly enough for it to be worth adding code
> for ksh93 to sh-script? Is "ksh" these days more likely to be ksh88 or
> ksh93?

That's a good question.  The folks on comp.unix.shell would say ksh93 (which
does have a lot of new features I'm just now learning about), but Sun e.g.
still distributes ksh88.  What do the major GNU/Linux distributions provide?

http://kornshell.com/
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/

-- 
Kevin Rodgers

Re: sh-script mode does not understand printf

[Kevin Rodgers]

Kevin Rodgers wrote:

> Glenn Morris wrote:
>> That's an awkward one, because (AFAICS) sh-script.el doesn't know
>> anything about ksh93. "ksh" is assumed to be ksh88. Do you think ksh88
>> and ksh93 differ significantly enough for it to be worth adding code
>> for ksh93 to sh-script? Is "ksh" these days more likely to be ksh88 or
>> ksh93?
> 
> That's a good question.  The folks on comp.unix.shell would say ksh93 
> (which
> does have a lot of new features I'm just now learning about), but Sun e.g.
> still distributes ksh88.  What do the major GNU/Linux distributions 
> provide?
> 
> http://kornshell.com/
> http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/

Oops, I meant to include a link to their (non-free) software license:


http://www.research.att.com/sw/license/ast-open.html

-- 
Kevin Rodgers