Chet Ramey wrote, on 19 Feb 2021: > > On 2/19/21 10:33 AM, Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote: > > > > Observe that rule 4 is applied for the first word in a pattern even if > > > that > > > pattern follows an opening parenthesis. Because of that, in my example, > > > the > > > esac in parentheses is interpreted as the esac keyword token, not a > > > regular > > > WORD token that makes for a valid pattern. > > > > Yes, rule 4 is applied there, but your mistake is in assuming that > > the *result* of rule 4 is that the token is converted to an Esac. > > How is it not? "the [sic] TOKEN is exactly the reserved word esac" at this > point. Why would it not return the token for `esac'? Or are you saying that > is not converted to an Esac?
Harald made essentially the same point in his last mail - see my reply to that. -- Geoff Clare <g.cl...@opengroup.org> The Open Group, Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading, RG1 1AX, England
