In article <1297175842.3030.25.camel@homebase>, [email protected] (Paul Smith) wrote:
> *From:* Paul Smith <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *CC:* [email protected] > *Date:* Tue, 08 Feb 2011 09:37:22 -0500 > > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 12:40 +0000, David Collier wrote: > > Ah.... I've had another look at this > > > > bash _allows_ the round brackets as in > > > > func2 () > > { > > } > > > > but on further examination, they are apparently redundant > > syntax!!!!! > > I'm not sure what you mean. The parentheses are definitely NOT > redundant; you cannot leave them off. Without them you don't have a > function definition, not in any POSIX-based shell (including bash) > anyway. > > ~$ foo { echo bar; } > bash: syntax error near unexpected token `}' > ~$ foo () { echo bar; } > ~$ foo > bar OK - I always thought that there was a fundamental incompatibility between the syntax for bash functions and that for ash But I couldn't recall the details when challenged above. so bash has function fred{} or fred(){} and ash has fred{} which means I was right originally - bash and ash scripts containing functions are syntactically incompatible. yes ????? D. _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
