Re[2]: Stable means not-changing?
On the bash thing...
I think it was a posix compliance thing. The man page for the posix
shell states that "{" and "}" are reserved words and the usage is like:
{ list ; }
The man page also states that ";" is a metacharacter that can be
replaced by one or more newlines. So the following would presumably
also work:
{
list
}
I also checked the ksh book (The Kornshell Command and Programming
Language) and it said the same thing (in more explicit language on page
125 & 161).
It seems to me that bash should have honored its extension to allow
{ list }
in any event. The key here is that it was always an extension and not
"standard" behavior. How serious a bug it is depends on how much you
follow posix. I probably would not have seen this bug since I use linux
as a home environment to support my work on hpux and dec osf1. Those
systems require the posix/ksh form...
jim
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Stable means not-changing?
Author: harlan@mymenus.com at ~AMSCCSSW
Date: 9/24/97 8:24 PM
[cut stuff]
--Pete
[*] Does anyone know where there was a doc explaining that "{ foo }"
suddenly had to become "{ foo; }" when upgrading to Bash-2.0? That
only choked on about a hundred of my scripts that had worked fine
under 1.14 (or whatever it was)...
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: