On 12/6/19 12:29 PM, Ilkka Virta wrote:
>>> Yes - sure. But then I'm wondering why the unquoted backtick doesn't
>>> start command substitution:
>>
>> It may be version dependent:
>>
>> $ echo ${BASH_VERSINFO[@]}
>> 5 0 7 1 release x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
>>
>> $ echo b{Z..a}d
>> bash: bad
On 6.12. 21:36, Eric Blake wrote:
On 12/5/19 10:53 PM, Martin Schulte wrote:
(2019-11-11) x86_64 GNU/Linux $ echo ${BASH_VERSINFO[@]}
4 4 12 1 release x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
$ set -x
$ echo {Z..a}
+ echo Z '[' '' ']' '^' _ '`' a
Z [ ] ^ _ ` a
It looks as if the backslash (between [ and ] in
On 12/6/19 11:27 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 12/6/19 9:23 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
I'm not sure I accept the explanation for the \ missing though, quoting is
also a parser activity (though some of it also happens in pattern matching).
But normally, backslashes (or any other form of quoting) that
On 12/5/19 10:53 PM, Martin Schulte wrote:
(2019-11-11) x86_64 GNU/Linux $ echo ${BASH_VERSINFO[@]}
4 4 12 1 release x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
$ set -x
$ echo {Z..a}
+ echo Z '[' '' ']' '^' _ '`' a
Z [ ] ^ _ ` a
It looks as if the backslash (between [ and ] in ASCII code) is
missing in brace
Date:Fri, 6 Dec 2019 05:53:04 +0100
From:Martin Schulte
Message-ID: <20191206055304.076d6115afa3a4f2a6a21...@schrader-schulte.de>
| Yes - sure. But then I'm wondering why the unquoted backtick doesn't
| start command substitution:
Too late. Syntax elements
On 12/6/19 9:23 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
> I'm not sure I accept the explanation for the \ missing though, quoting is
> also a parser activity (though some of it also happens in pattern matching).
> But normally, backslashes (or any other form of quoting) that result from
> expansions are simply
On 12/5/19 8:53 PM, Martin Schulte wrote:
>> It's an unquoted backslash, which is removed by quote removal when the
>> words are expanded. Look at the extra space between `[' and `]'; that's
>> the null argument resulting from the unquoted backslash.
>
> Yes - sure. But then I'm wondering why
On Tue, 2019-11-26 at 18:26 +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> With that in mind the message in question isn't really confusing at all.
I agree. With one little exception.
Bash has two levels of error checking, that can generate the message.
1) Command line parsing and interpreting.
2) Bash script
