On 22.12.19 21:04, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Almost a good point, considering…
> 
> $ x=(a 'b c')
> $ IFS=,
> $ a="${x[*]}"; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a,b c>
> $ a="${x[@]}"; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a b c>
> $ a=${x[*]}; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a,b c>
> $ a=${x[@]}; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a b c>
> $ a="${u:-"${x[*]}"}"; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a,b c>
> $ a="${u:-"${x[@]}"}"; print -r -- "<$a>"
> <a b c>
> 
> Oh the other hand, according to POSIX, using “$@” (contrary to “$*”) in
> double-quotes in scalar context is unspecified unless part of “word” in
> “${foo:-word}”… I guess mksh and zsh just equal it to $* there, whereas
> AT&T ksh93 and GNU bash don’t.

I try to summarize my understanding so far: the missing bit for me was your 
above
example of first assigning to an auxiliary variable before printing. what you, 
then,
show above in your `print' output is identical with what ksh93/bash do when 
issuing
the different variants of `cat <<< ${x[*]}': IFS honoured with `*' and ignored 
with `@',
irrespective of quoting (when constructing the here string or auxiliary 
variable).

while this is one twist too much for me already (since it it not immediately 
obvious to the user
that the here string introduces that second level of expansion), I probably 
understand it now.

regarding the discrepant behaviour of mksh and zsh regarding `@', I have to 
believe you that it is 
OK, i.e. covered by the standard since unspecified ;). what I still do _not_ 
really get:

IFS=,

a="${x[@]}"; print -r -- "<$a>"  # ==> <a b c>

a="${u:-x[@]}"; print -r -- "<$a>"  # ==> <a b c>

# vs.

cat <<< "$x[@]}" # ==?> a, b c

I thought what you were saying is that during here string construction the same 
is going on as when 
assigning to the auxiliary variable `a' above? so even if the behaviour at this 
point is 
unspecified, it should be deterministic/always the same, no?

and in any case the question remains: are ksh93/bash not less surprising here 
and closer to what the 
naive user might expect (simply because `@' continues to behave as defined 
(even if only in a 
different context...))? and would it not be better if mksh would follow ksh93 
behaviour here 
(considering that it overall is the most faithful ksh93 clone/look alike I know 
of...)?

> 
> As for the mailing list… writing to postmaster@, but if your mail
> provider is either on the blacklist (Yahoo, OVH, …) or too stupid for
> SMTP (Hotmail, Googlemail, …) I guess you’re somewhat out of luck. (I

yes, gmail it is...

> didn’t see any connection to postmaster@ in my logs (from Dec 20, 16:00,
> onwards, I don’t retain older logs), nor in my greylisting, if that’s a

my tries where earlier, somewhen in november.

> consolation.) You can try another eMail service or read at https://www
> .mail-archive.com/miros-mksh@mirbsd.org/ or so…

that or I declare every question a bug and post it here ;). no, won't do
that. promise....

-- 
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/1857195

Title:
  here string behaviour different in mksh and ksh93

Status in mksh:
  New

Bug description:
  consider

  IFS=$'\n'
  x=(a "b c")
  cat <<< ${x[*]}
  cat <<< "${x[*]}"
  cat <<< ${x[@]}
  cat <<< "${x[@]}"

  executing this in mksh (or zsh, incidentally) yields the output

  a
  b c
  a
  b c
  a
  b c
  a
  b c

  (i.e. identical output, always inserting first IFS char between
  elements, for all variants of accessing all elements of the array)
  while ksh93 (or bash, for that matter) yields

  a
  b c
  a
  b c
  a b c
  a b c

  (i.e. `*' behaves different from `@' but double quoting is
  ineffectual).

  I am not sure whether this is a bug (either in ksh93 or mksh) but wanted to 
report this inconsistency and to ask for clarification. what I _would_ have 
expected to start with is, that
  the above "here string" commands would yield the same output as

  print ${x[*]}
  print "${x[*]}"
  print ${x[@]}
  print "${x[@]}"

  which is neither true for ksh93 nor for mksh. is this all good and
  well and I am only overlooking something obvious?

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mksh/+bug/1857195/+subscriptions

Reply via email to