| To: | gwc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: $@ and set -u |
| From: | Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 5 May 2009 10:52:41 -0400 |
| Cc: | austin-group-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, chet@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Read-receipt-to: | chet.ramey@case.edu |
| References: | <200904301329.n3UDTOXH005366@penguin.research.att.com> <49FEEF0E.9010109@case.edu> <20090505091501.GA10097@squonk.masqnet> |
> Actually, $? and $! are the only special parameters other than $* > and $@ that can be used when unset if -u is on, so I wouldn't mind > if those two were treated as the special case rather than $* and $@, > but probably the wording will be simpler with $* and $@ as the > special case, e.g.: > > "The shell shall write a message to standard error and immediately exit > when it tries to expand an unset parameter other than the '@' and '*' > special parameters." I will change bash back to doing this. I would like to again request text in the rationale that notes we are deciding to not perpetuate historical practice. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU chet@case.edu http://tiswww.tis.case.edu/~chet/ |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: $@ and set -u, Chet Ramey |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: $@ and set -u, Chet Ramey |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: $@ and set -u, Chet Ramey |
| Next by Thread: | Re: $@ and set -u, Chet Ramey |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |