Re: function grammar
Ken Irving wrote: So maybe the declaration could be fixed to show that, e.g., as either of: name () compound-command [redirection] function name [()] compound-command [redirection] I can't see how to put that in one construct... BNF would use: 'function' NAME | NAME '()' compound-command [redirection] (ignoring that it would probably also specify SPACE where needed maybe using bash syntax: +(function _name_ | _name_ () ) compound-command [redirection]
BUG: grammar handler needs to be fixed to recognize Bash syntax.... (was Re: function grammar)
The following function is legal syntax, but yields an error:
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
To which Andreas comments that it's a grammar bug:
Andreas Schwab wrote:
Bernd Eggink mono...@sudrala.de writes:
If the function reserved word is supplied, the parentheses are
optional.
While the grammer has the right rules for this the handling inside of
special_case_tokens isn't right up to it, it only recognizes '{'
following 'function WORD'.
Andreas.
Re: function grammar
from man bash, to define a function use;
function name compound-command
OR
name () compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
( list)
{ list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
Good catch. This will be fixed in bash-4.2.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRUc...@case.eduhttp://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
Re: function grammar
I see this in bash(1): SHELL GRAMMAR ... Shell Function Definitions ... [ function ] name () compound-command [redirection] and do not see the version you show without the parens. Read the text following the definition. It says, in part: If the function reserved word is supplied, the parentheses are optional. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRUc...@case.eduhttp://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
Re: function grammar
So maybe the declaration could be fixed to show that, e.g., as either of: name () compound-command [redirection] function name [()] compound-command [redirection] I think this is a great suggestion. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRUc...@case.eduhttp://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
Re: function grammar
Linda Walsh wrote: The curly brackets are suposed to be optional. They are line 2 of the Compound commands list below... Don't ask me why, but it works when you don't use the function keyword, but () instead: foo() [[ 1 ]] Might be a parsing bug, though you shouldn't use function at all.
Re: function grammar
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:53:02AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
from man bash, to define a function use;
function name compound-command
OR
name () compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
( list)
{ list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
I see this in bash(1):
SHELL GRAMMAR
...
Shell Function Definitions
...
[ function ] name () compound-command [redirection]
and do not see the version you show without the parens.
$ function good_dir() [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
$ good_dir; echo $?
1
$ good_dir /tmp; echo $?
0
Ken
Re: function grammar
Am 19.07.2010 08:30, schrieb Ken Irving:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:53:02AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
from man bash, to define a function use;
function namecompound-command
OR
name ()compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
(list)
{list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
I see this in bash(1):
SHELL GRAMMAR
...
Shell Function Definitions
...
[ function ] name () compound-command [redirection]
and do not see the version you show without the parens.
It's there. Look at the 3rd sentence:
If the function reserved word is supplied, the parentheses are
optional.
Bernd
--
Bernd Eggink
http://sudrala.de
Re: function grammar
Bernd Eggink mono...@sudrala.de writes:
If the function reserved word is supplied, the parentheses are
optional.
While the grammer has the right rules for this the handling inside of
special_case_tokens isn't right up to it, it only recognizes '{'
following 'function WORD'.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
And now for something completely different.
Re: function grammar
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:46:30AM +0200, Bernd Eggink wrote:
Am 19.07.2010 08:30, schrieb Ken Irving:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:53:02AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
from man bash, to define a function use;
function namecompound-command
OR
name ()compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
(list)
{list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
I see this in bash(1):
SHELL GRAMMAR
...
Shell Function Definitions
...
[ function ] name () compound-command [redirection]
and do not see the version you show without the parens.
It's there. Look at the 3rd sentence:
If the function reserved word is supplied, the parentheses are
optional.
So maybe the declaration could be fixed to show that, e.g., as either of:
name () compound-command [redirection]
function name [()] compound-command [redirection]
I can't see how to put that in one construct...
Ken
Re: function grammar
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org wrote:
from man bash, to define a function use;
function name compound-command
OR
name () compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
( list)
{ list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
You should enclose the function body code in between `{' and `}':
function good_dir { [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]; }
Re: function grammar
The curly brackets are suposed to be optional.
They are line 2 of the Compound commands list below...
Clark J. Wang wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org
mailto:b...@tlinx.org wrote:
from man bash, to define a function use;
function name compound-command
OR
name () compound-command
right?
And Compound Commands are:
( list)
{ list; )
(( expression ))
[[ expression ]]
...et al
so why do I get a syntax error for
function good_dir [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `[['
You should enclose the function body code in between `{' and `}':
function good_dir { [[ -n $1 -d $1 -r $1 -x $1 ]]; }
