On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:47 PM, Rhialto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon 23 Jun 2008 at 16:14:51 -0400, James Vega wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 09:47:15PM +0200, Rhialto wrote: >> > >> > On Tue 17 Jun 2008 at 10:44:50 -0400, James Vega wrote: >> > > I have to agree with Chip here that the upstream version should default >> > > to Bourne as that is most likely to cause people to actually configure >> > > the highlighting to work properly for the variant of /bin/sh that *they* >> > > are using. >> > >> > But the current Bourne shell *is* a POSIX shell. >> >> You're thinking of the Bourne-Again SHell (aka bash). I'm referring to >> the actual Bourne shell, which isn't obsolete yet. > > No, I'm not. On the BSDs for instance, /bin/sh is not bash nor ksh nor > ash nor dash, but it *is* a POSIX shell. For the simple reason that > currenent Unixen ought to be POSIX compliant. I remember programming for the Bourne Shell on HPUX years ago, and /bin/sh certainly did not have $(...) but only had backticks `...`. I did a quick, search and found this which confirms it: http://docs.hp.com/en/B2355-90046/ch15s03.html == BEGIN QUOTE === The POSIX and Korn Shells are supersets of the Bourne Shell and contain all of the Bourne Shell's syntactic constructs, and almost all of its semantics. However, POSIX and Korn Shell implement some features above and beyond those in the Bourne shell. They are: ...snip... Command substitution syntax $(command). ...snip... == END QUOTE === So it's fine if $(...) is highlighted as an error by default in my opinion. If you don't want it as an error, you can add this to your ~/.vimrc: let g:is_posix=1 -- Dominique --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
