[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
The following issue has been RESOLVED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: Resolved Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text:https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6614 Resolution: Accepted As Marked Fixed in Version: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2024-01-04 16:56 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... related to 351 certain shell special built-ins should ... == Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 2023-10-28 06:28 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001393 2023-10-28 06:30 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 351 2023-10-30 14:07 chet_ramey Note Added: 0006559 2023-12-11 15:37 geoffclare Note Added: 0006597 2023-12-11 23:19 kreNote Added: 0006601 2023-12-18 16:54 shware_systems Note Added: 0006612 2024-01-04 16:54 geoffclare Note Added: 0006614 2024-01-04 16:56 geoffclare Final Accepted Text => https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6614 2024-01-04 16:56 geoffclare Status New => Resolved 2024-01-04 16:56 geoffclare Resolution Open => Accepted As Marked ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2024-01-04 16:54 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... related to 351 certain shell special built-ins should ... == -- (0006614) geoffclare (manager) - 2024-01-04 16:54 https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6614 -- On page 2483 line 80766 section 2.9.1.1, change:The first word (if any) that is not a variable assignment or redirection shall be expanded. If any fields remain following its expansion, the first field shall be considered the command name. If no fields remain, the next word (if any) shall be expanded, and so on, until a command name is found or no words remain. If there is a command name and it is recognized as a declaration utility, then any remaining words after the word that expanded to produce the command name, that would be recognized as a variable assignment in isolation, shall be expanded as a variable assignment (tilde expansion after the first and after any unquoted , parameter expansion, command substitution, arithmetic expansion, and quote removal, but no field splitting or pathname expansion); while remaining words that would not be a variable assignment in isolation shall be subject to regular expansion (tilde expansion for only a leading , parameter expansion, command substitution, arithmetic expansion, field splitting, pathname expansion, and quote removal). For all other command names, words after the word that produced the command name shall be subject only to regular expansion. All fields resulting from the expansion of the word that produced the command name and the subsequent words, except for the field containing the command name, shall be the arguments for the command.to:The first word (if any) that is not a variable assignment or redirection, and any subsequent words, shall be processed as follows: The first word may be matched lexically against the names of declaration utilities. The first word shall be expanded. If any fields remain following expansion of the first word, the first field shall be considered the command name. If no fields remain, the next word (if any) shall be expanded, and so on, until a command name is found or no words remain. If the above optional matching against the names of declaration utilities was not performed and there is a command name, the command name shall be matched lexically against the names of declaration utilities. If whichever of the matching operations that was performed produced a successful match, any remaining words after the word that expanded to produce the command name, that would be recognized as a variable assignment in isolation, shall be expanded as a variable assignment (tilde expansion after the first and after any unquoted , parameter expansion, command substitution, arithmetic expansion, and quote removal, but no field splitting or pathname expansion); while remaining words that would not be a variable assignment in isolation shall be subject to regular expansion (tilde expansion for only a leading , parameter expansion, command substitution, arithmetic expansion, field splitting, pathname expansion, and quote removal). If the matching operation did not produce a successful match, words after the word that produced the command name shall be subject only to regular expansion. All fields resulting from the expansion of the word that pro
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-12-11 15:37 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... related to 351 certain shell special built-ins should ... == -- (0006597) geoffclare (manager) - 2023-12-11 15:37 https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6597 -- Suggested changes... On page 2483 line 80769 section 2.9.1.1, change:If there is a command name and it is recognized as a declaration utility, then any remaining words after the word that expanded to produce the command name, ...to:If there is a command name, the shell shall use one of the following methods to check whether the utility to be invoked is a declaration utility: The value, prior to expansion, of the word that expanded to produce the command name is matched lexically against the names of declaration utilities. The command name is matched lexically against the names of declaration utilities.If the chosen method identifies the utility to be invoked as a declaration utility, then any remaining words after the word that expanded to produce the command name, ... On page 2483 line 80778 section 2.9.1.1, change:For all other command names, words after the word that produced the command name shall be subject only to regular expansion.to:If the utility to be invoked is not identified as a declaration utility, words after the word that produced the command name shall be subject only to regular expansion. On page 2483 line 80790 section 2.9.1.1, delete:When determining whether a command name is a declaration utility, an implementation may use only lexical analysis. It is unspecified whether assignment context will be used if the command name would only become recognized as a declaration utility after word expansions. Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 2023-10-28 06:28 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001393 2023-10-28 06:30 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 351 2023-10-30 14:07 chet_ramey Note Added: 0006559 2023-12-11 15:37 geoffclare Note Added: 0006597 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-30 14:07 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... related to 351 certain shell special built-ins should ... == -- (0006559) chet_ramey (reporter) - 2023-10-30 14:07 https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6559 -- Look at issue 1393 for a discussion about why it's acceptable to recognize such names lexically: so the parser can allow extended assignment syntax such as compound array assignment. Since the NetBSD sh doesn't have those, you can ignore it. Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 2023-10-28 06:28 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001393 2023-10-28 06:30 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 351 2023-10-30 14:07 chet_ramey Note Added: 0006559 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 351. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-28 06:30 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... related to 351 certain shell special built-ins should ... == Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 2023-10-28 06:28 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001393 2023-10-28 06:30 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 351 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 0001393. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-28 06:28 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... related to 0001393 'command' should not be treated as a de... == Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 2023-10-28 06:28 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001393 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 0001535. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-28 06:27 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == Relationships ID Summary -- related to 0001535 Poor description of declaration (all re... == Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 2023-10-28 06:27 Don Cragun Relationship added related to 0001535 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
A NOTE has been added to this issue. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-28 05:48 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities == -- (0006557) kre (reporter) - 2023-10-28 05:48 https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785#c6557 -- This issue is very much related to https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1535 (the resolution to which was applied in Feb 2022, which is well before Issue 8 Draft 3, so the text from that bug resolution is what was considered here). In https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1535 I pointed out this contradictory text, but that part of the issue was completely ignored... It still needs fixing. Issue History Date ModifiedUsername FieldChange == 2023-10-28 04:09 kreNew Issue 2023-10-28 04:09 kreName => Robert Elz 2023-10-28 04:09 kreSection => XCU 2.9.1.1 2023-10-28 04:09 krePage Number => 2483 2023-10-28 04:09 kreLine Number => 80766-80778, 80790-80792 2023-10-28 05:48 kreNote Added: 0006557 ==
[Issue 8 drafts 0001785]: Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities
The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1785 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: == Project:Issue 8 drafts Issue ID: 1785 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Objection Priority: normal Status: New Name: Robert Elz Organization: User Reference: Section:XCU 2.9.1.1 Page Number:2483 Line Number:80766-80778, 80790-80792 Final Accepted Text: == Date Submitted: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC Last Modified: 2023-10-28 04:09 UTC == Summary:Conflict in specification of processing of declaration utilities Description: In XCU 2.9.1.1 bullet point 2, ut is said: The first word (if any) that is not a variable assignment or redirection shall be expanded. If any fields remain following its expansion, the first field shall be considered the command name. If no fields remain, the next word (if any) shall be expanded, and so on, until a command name is found or no words remain. All that is fine and boring, then it continues: If there is a command name and it is recognized as a declaration utility, then any remaining words after the word that expanded to produce the command name, that would be recognized as a variable assignment in isolation, shall be expanded as a variable assignment [...] (it goes on to what all of that means, which is not important here). Note the required sequence, "the first word shall be expanded" ... [If there is one and] "it is recognised as a declaration utility" ... "shall be expanded as a variable assignment" ... There is nothing optional about what is specified there, first expand the word(s), then having found the command name, check if it (the result of the expansion) is a declaration utility, and if so do the special processing that is to be required of such things. But later, after the bullet points, at lines 80790-80792 (right at the bottom of page 2483) it says: When determining whether a command name is a declaration utility, an implementation may use only lexical analysis. That isn't what the previous text seems to require to me. It is unspecified whether assignment context will be used if the command name would only become recognized as a declaration utility after word expansions. To me, that looks to be very explicitly specified, as quoted above. Desired Action: Reconcile this nonsense. Best would be to delete the notion of "declaration utilities" completely, or at least make them optional (unspecified whether such things work). They're never needed, one can always simply write export FOO FOO=whatever-I-like and the assignment will be handled as a var-assign, without any magic special rules (those two statements can be written in either order, except for "readonly" where the assignment must come first), or if you prefer, the following also works FOO=whatever-I-like export FOO if you really need to do it all in one statement. This declaration utility nonsense (the special rules for arg processing) were added just to pacify people who don't understand the order in which the shell parses commands in general, and the syntax of the parts. What's more, including it, then leads to people wondering why (if we assume a file named "foo bar" (without the quotes) exists in '.' dd if=~/foo* ... or awk -v var=foo* ... aren't parsed the same way, after all, they look just the same, your average shell command line user has no idea what a "declaration utility" might be. Must easier to explain that the special rules for things which look like (and always are) var-assigns apply only to those which appear before the command name, as soon as there is anything (other than a redirect) all the special processing stops. But in any case, this "shall do ..." followed immediately by "may be done differently" needs to be fixed, one way or the other - either change bullet point 2 to make all of what it says about finding declaration utilities optional, or simply remove lines 90790-2, and require it to be implemented as in bullet point 2. [Aside: none of this means much to me, I have no intention of implementing "declaration utilities" whichever scheme were to be adopted.] == Issue History Date ModifiedUsername
