For displaying message and print data there are two command available printf and echo.
Then how differently they used? Which is more preferable?
- 80,446
- 37,289
2 Answers
Preferable and most widely used is not the same thing. While printf is better for many reasons, most people still use echo because the syntax is simpler.
The main reasons why you should prefer printf are:
echois not standardized, it will behave differently on different systems.It is hard to predict what you're actually running when you
echo foo. To illustrate, on my Debian system:$ type -a echo echo is a shell builtin echo is /bin/echoAs you can see, there are two different
echocommands, one is a shell (bash in this case) builtin and another is a separate binary. Note thatbashalso has aprintfbuiltin but its behavior is more standardized so it is less of an issue (thanks to @ RaduRădeanu for pointing it out).Since some (but not all) implementations of
echosupport command line switches, it is hard to print a string that starts with a-. While many programs support--to signify the end of switches and the beginning of arguments (for example,grep -- -a filewill find lines infilethat contain-a),echodoes not. So, how do you haveechoprint-n?$ echo -n ## no output $ echo '-n' ## no output $ echo "-n" ## no output $ echo \-n ## no output $ echo -e '\055n' ## using the ASCII code works but only on implementations -n ## that support -eprintfcan do this easily:$ printf -- '-n\n' -n $ printf '%s\n' -n -n $ printf '\055n\n' -n
For more information than you ever wanted to know on why printf is better than echo, see this answer to a similar question on http://unix.stackexchange.com:
To ask which is preferable is itself incomplete.
If all one wishes to do is emit one or more lines of text terminated by newlines, then echo suffices. If anything more clever is intended, specifically including a "partial line" that does not have the newline, then printf is best for that purpose.
- 39