Re: diotalevi's grep

Just curious ... had there been any updates (especially related to any bugs (not that I have used it)) which are not reflected in OP? And, is the posted program being maintained?

Comment on Re: diotalevi's grep

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: diotalevi's grep by diotalevi (Canon) on Mar 13, 2007 at 23:43 UTC
There's been no compelling reason to change it. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]
Re^3: diotalevi's grep by parv (Parson) on Mar 14, 2007 at 01:53 UTC
Ok then; thanks much. I wanted to verify as I have been giving it (along with ack, and tcgrep) as references (for grep alternatives).	[reply]
Re^4: diotalevi's grep by diotalevi (Canon) on Mar 14, 2007 at 03:48 UTC
ack is pretty neat and what I now use most of the time. I probably wouldn't have bothered to write my own version if ack had existed beforehand. I'd just have hacked on the archive reading to ack instead. I still probably will. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks