Re: info inconsistency about "Shell Commands in Dired"

[Masatake YAMATO]

Before continuing discussion, I'd like to add explanation which
I forget writing in the last mail.

I wrote:
> How about passing file names via environment variables?
> So the user can specify the environment variables to use the file names.
> 
> We use ${dired} for the replacement of `?'; and ${DIRED} for the
> replacement of `*'. Prepend "export dired=...; export DIRED=...;" 
> to the command line given from the user.

"export dired=...; export DIRED=...;" is perpend to the command line by
dired automatically. I misused an imperative form, "Prepend". 
I should use "Dired prepends".

Go back to the discussion.

Luc Teirlinck worte:
>    How about passing file names via environment variables?
>    So the user can specify the environment variables to use the file names.
> 
>    We use ${dired} for the replacement of `?'; and ${DIRED} for the
>    replacement of `*'. Prepend "export dired=...; export DIRED=...;" 
>    to the command line given from the user.
> 
> ${dired} is as long to type as `echo ? `.  I am not even sure that
> `echo ? ` is really a joke as David suggested.  Having to use
> something that is somewhat funny looking is not too bad if you only
> have to do it very infrequently.  

Normally, the user should use ? and *. The user can ignore the environment
variables. If you tihnk ${dired} is too long, we can introduce shorter 
variable name. In some case we don't have to use `{' and `}', as you know.

The biggest advantage of this method is that it is not tricky. If one 
knows the shell script syntax, s/he can use this method.

In other hand, about `?' and `*', I have to read *Help* buffer for `
dired-do-shell-command' and the info document when "uuencode ? ? >
?.uu" generates a file, ?.uu.

About `echo ? `, I don't want to explain this technique for my wife:-P

Masatake YAMATO