On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 05:37:56PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 29 January 2006 17:25, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > The bash manual documents this as "Patterns to be brace expanded
> > take the form of an optional PREAMBLE, followed by either a series
> > of comma-separated strings or a sequnce expression between a pair of
> > braces, followed by an optional POSTSCRIPT." Your example did not
> > have either comma-separated strings nor a sequence and therefore
> > does not qualify for brace expansion and should have been left
> > verbatim. And yet bash did brace expansion anyway. That is an
> > inconsistency.
>
> a-{b}-c was not brace expanded, ok, good
>
> a-{b{d,e}}-c was "expanded" too many times ... the output should have
> been a-{bd}-c a-{be}-c ... just cause csh does it differently doesnt
> really matter imo
>
> as you pointed out, the docs say that the brace expansion should only
> happen when commas or sequence expressions are used, and while the
> inner braces used commads, the outer braces did not -mike
Let's see...
a-{b{d,e}}-c
a-{bd,be}-c
a-bd-c a-be-c
It looks okey, I think.
--
William Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Toronto, Canada
ThinFlash: Linux thin-client on USB key (flash) drive
http://home.eol.ca/~parkw/thinflash.html
BashDiff: Super Bash shell
http://freshmeat.net/projects/bashdiff/
_______________________________________________
Bug-bash mailing list
Bug-bash@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash
