In article <slrnekibq7.dgd.random@rlaptop.random.yi.org>,
Jordan Abel <random@random.yi.org> wrote:

> 2006-11-01 <1162421181.066939.217790@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups .com>,
> Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > Jordan Abel wrote:
> >> Why do you want this? As long as your script doesn't use extensions,
> >> it'll run just fine with or without them enabled. ...or are you trying
> >> to test your script for posix-compliance by trial and error? don't do
> >> that. that's not the way to write a good script.
> >
> > Right! Real Programmers don't need any diagnostics whatsoever. They cat
> > something from the tty into a file, and it not only runs, but is 100%
> > standard-conforming. And they are exempt from ever running tools to
> > find problems in other people's code.
>
> Trial and error isn't the right way to find it.

What's the better way to confirm that a script only uses POSIX shell
features?

--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***