Re: IFS behaviour (was: ash vs. bash)
>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Slootman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Paul> The current behaviour seems to be that IFS is only being
Paul> used when evaluating things the second time round;
Paul> i.e.. like this:
Paul> $ IFS=":$IFS"
Paul> $ set a:b:c
Paul> $ echo "$1"
Paul> $ echo $1
Paul> a b c
Eh? ash on my laptop gives the following
$ set a:b:c
$ echo $1
a b c
$ echo "$1"
Paul> Can anyone shed some light on this? Is this something
Paul> mandated by POSIX? I mean, it's too much of a coincidence
Paul> that ash, bash, ksh all have this new (and for me
Paul> unexpected) behaviour. It also shed new light on the
Paul> meaning of "Bourne shell compatibility"; I'll look this up
Paul> in the book I have at home written by Bourne himself...
I think perhaps studying the influences of "" on command-line
arguments would be valuable. :)
"If 8-year-old boys discharging loaded firearms into their own legs
isn't necessary to the maintenance of a well-regulated militia, I
don't know what is." - Randal Cummings as reported in The Onion, 25/5/99