On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 01:40:32AM +0100, Harald van Dijk wrote: > > If the syntax stack is to be stored on the actual stack, then real recursion > could be used instead, as attached. I tried to avoid recursion for the cases > that unpatched dash already handled properly.
It does look a lot simpler than I expected. However, this patch is still 30% bigger than my patch :) As real recursion doesn't seem to buy us much I think I'll stick with the syntax stack for now. > @@ -941,20 +1042,25 @@ readtoken1(int firstc, char const *syntax, char > *eofmark, int striptabs) > c != '\\' && c != '`' && > c != '$' && ( > c != '"' || > - eofmark != NULL > + (eofmark != NULL && > !varnest) > + ) && ( > + c != '}' || > + !varnest || > + (dqvarnest ? innerdq : > dblquote) So this seems to be the only substantial difference between your patch and mine. I have looked at the behaviour of other shells and I think I will stick with my patch's behaviour for now. In general, if there are disagreements between shells and the standard is not specific enough, I'll pick the approach that results in simpler code. Thanks, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dash" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
