A NOTE has been added to this issue. ====================================================================== https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1892 ====================================================================== Reported By: calestyo Assigned To: ====================================================================== Project: 1003.1(2024)/Issue8 Issue ID: 1892 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Clarification Requested Severity: Editorial Priority: normal Status: New Name: Christoph Anton Mitterer Organization: User Reference: Section: 2.7 Redirection Page Number: 2493 Line Number: 80966, ff. Interp Status: --- Final Accepted Text: ====================================================================== Date Submitted: 2024-12-12 03:40 UTC Last Modified: 2024-12-12 14:40 UTC ====================================================================== Summary: definition of `{location}>redir-op word` does not specify whether a qouted location is still considered part of the redirection ======================================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------- (0007000) calestyo (reporter) - 2024-12-12 14:40 https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1892#c7000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > They were already nonportable because implementations > had introduced {var}>file etc. in contravention of the > previous standard. In practise, yes. But if one just looks at the standard text for the previous edition, echo {var}>file should have portably caused {var} being the arg 1 for echo, at least for fully compliant implementations. > I believe (a) is covered by the existing language In principle yes (because behaviour is defined to be implementation-defined), but I thought it might be helpful to indicate that both behaviours actually exist in the wild. But can live without. > More useful than (b) would be something stating that applications > that wish to avoid that format should ensure that one or more > <blank> characters precede redir-op. Well that's basically what I've meant. What do you think about a sentence like: For portability, the application shall ensure that any {location} that is not meant to be part of a redirection is separated from redir-op by one or more <blank> characters. Not sure though, were one should place it: - If done somewhere below the: "The shell may support an additional format used for redirection:" it feels a bit as if the mandate to ensure is also part of the "may". Plus it may happen easier that people don't even read into the section, because they think they wouldn't use that feature anyway, while it may still affect them in the "normal" redirection form. - If done above, and thus still in the section that explains the "normal" redirection form, then {location} hasn't been defined at that point, yet. Issue History Date Modified Username Field Change ====================================================================== 2024-12-12 03:40 calestyo New Issue 2024-12-12 03:40 calestyo Name => Christoph Anton Mitterer 2024-12-12 03:40 calestyo Section => 2.7 Redirection 2024-12-12 03:40 calestyo Page Number => 2493 2024-12-12 03:40 calestyo Line Number => 80966, ff. 2024-12-12 05:02 larryv Note Added: 0006994 2024-12-12 05:19 calestyo Note Added: 0006995 2024-12-12 06:31 larryv Note Added: 0006996 2024-12-12 14:40 calestyo Note Added: 0007000 ======================================================================
