** Changed in: mksh
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of mksh
Mailing List, which is subscribed to mksh.
Matching subscriptions: mkshlist-to-mksh-bugmail
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1857702
Title:
" +=" operator
This totally makes sense in mksh only.
$ i=4+4; echo $i
This is an assignment of the string "4+4" to the variable i. The string
is then, between assignment and storage, parsed as an arithmetic
expression, because i is of integer type. The expression is calculated
and the result stored.
$ i=i+1;
Op 29-12-19 om 23:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
As discussed heavily on IRC, other shells can use ((…)) or let to work
like mksh, and the mksh behaviour is semantically correct.
Your position makes no sense, because in mksh (and ksh93, bash, zsh) you
can do things like:
$ typeset -i i
$
maybe you can convince the `shellcheck' guys to support mksh ;).
but I was rather thinking of "error" as in "syntax error", i.e. disallow
+= on integers all together as being then easy to spot and repair. I am
somewhat paranoid about shells silently behaving differently, that's all
... :). for
Warning reporting during running of a script is supremely hard, you
cannot use any file descriptors; basically, you have to reserve one with
a high number for syslog and do it that way and hope someone reads
syslog… so I never did. We really need a linting shell runner or
something ☹
--
You
thanks for making this discrepant behaviour of mksh more explicit in the
manpage/FAQ. I believe this is helpful (as, generally, a
"(in)compatibility table" comparing all relevant shells would be...).
regarding opening bugs all over the place in (at least) 3 other shells
for this issue: funny ;).
As discussed heavily on IRC, other shells can use ((…)) or let to work
like mksh, and the mksh behaviour is semantically correct. I’ve
documented this in more detail in the manual page and the mksh FAQ now
but kept the behaviour as to not break older scripts written in mksh.
You might wish to
On 27.12.19 23:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> and it’s most definitely not emulation of ksh93
>
> some ksh88 and little parts of ksh93, but e.g. no float and other crap
I've never used ksh88. so I do not know the intersection with ksh93. but my
experience so far is
that it seems easier to port a
and it’s most definitely not emulation of ksh93
some ksh88 and little parts of ksh93, but e.g. no float and other crap
or complicated things
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of mksh
Mailing List, which is subscribed to mksh.
Matching subscriptions:
01 in an integer variable is still 1 on output (010 may be 10 or 8
depending on the posix flag)
more later
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of mksh
Mailing List, which is subscribed to mksh.
Matching subscriptions: mkshlist-to-mksh-bugmail
On 27.12.19 17:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Erm… that’s right, += is string concatenation.
ok, I got it that this seems to be the idea here, but
1.
what about
typeset -i x=0; x+=1; echo $x # → 1 (as in ksh/bash/zsh)
if += categorically does string concat no matter what, should this not
Erm… that’s right, += is string concatenation.
Write “let” before the line to make it integer addition.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of mksh
Mailing List, which is subscribed to mksh.
Matching subscriptions: mkshlist-to-mksh-bugmail
12 matches
Mail list logo
