- Oct 2021
Shaffer, C. (n.d.). Nearly every person in Iran seems to have had covid-19 at least once. New Scientist. Retrieved 21 October 2021, from https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294215-nearly-every-person-in-iran-seems-to-have-had-covid-19-at-least-once/
- Mar 2021
Alkaati ba jàpp na sàcc.
Le gardien de la paix a pris un voleur.
alkaati bi -- policeman.
ba -- the (indicates remoteness).
jàpp v. -- grab, take, stop.
na -- (?).
sàcc bi -- thief.
- Nov 2020
Man, for some reason, I really like this answer. I recognize it's a bit more complicated, but it seems so useful. And given that I'm no bash expert, it leads me to believe that my logic is faulty, and there's something wrong with this methodology, otherwise, I feel others would have given it more praise. So, what's the problem with this function? Is there anything I should be looking out for here?
I think the main thing wrong with it is the eval (which I think can be changed to
$("$@")and it's pretty verbose.
Also, there are more concise ways to do it that would probably appeal more to most bash experts...
like set -x
and it does unnecessary things: why save output to a variable? Just let output go to where it would normally go...
So yeah, I can see why this solution isn't very popular. And I'm rather surprised by all the praise comments it's gotten.
- why aren't people talking about/asking this?
- good question
- good point
- why isn't this more popular?
- why isn't this more common/the norm?
- hasn't caught on / gained popularity
- Oct 2020