[2013-02-12 14:27] Truls Becken <truls.becken_AT_gmail.com>
> On 2013-02-12, at 13:22, Chris Down wrote:
>
> > Considering he's already doing rudimentary filtering through in *addition*
> > to sed calls, awk is more generalisable choice to the problem set.
>
> Alternatively, you could say that sed is the more generalisable choice since
> grep is pretty much a subset of sed.
I disagree because grep (with -E or as egrep) does support Extended
Regular Expressions, which sed does not.
The following is NOT portable:
> sed -E 's/\s\+// ; /"(vim|surf):"/d'
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/sed.html
If you want sed with Extended Regular Expressions, take awk. :-)
meillo
Received on Tue Feb 12 2013 - 16:38:20 CET