When the comment is inside of a substituted process.
#! /bin/bash -ex
#
tee >(
# this is nifty
echo hi there
)
The above works. Whereas the below fails.
#! /bin/bash -ex
#
tee >(
# ain't this nifty
echo hi there
)
It burps thusly:
./foo.sh: line 7: bad substit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/30/13 10:30 AM, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-07-30 10:18, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> After the fork() which creates the subshell, each of the two processes
>> (parent and child) is still within its own instance of the function.
>> The "return" command
On 7/30/13 6:00 AM, Jesper Brix Rosenkilde wrote:
> Bash Version: 4.2
> Patch Level: 45
> Release Status: release
>
> Description:
> When comparing ' a' with '0a' using the less than operator, using [ ] and
> [[ ]] tests respectively gives different results.
>
> Repeat-By:
> [ ' a' \< '0a' ] &&
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -DPACKAGE
On 2013-07-30 10:18, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> After the fork() which creates the subshell, each of the two processes
> (parent and child) is still within its own instance of the function.
> The "return" command executed in the child causes the child's function
> to terminate, but this does not cause
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 04:12:07PM +0200, Roman Rakus wrote:
> >>f1() {
> >> : | while :; do return 3; done
> >> echo $?
> >> return 1
> >>}
> >>echo $?
> >>f1; echo $?
> >>return 2
> My point is that the `return 3' in while loop is in subshell and will
> not return from the function
On 07/30/2013 03:50 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 7/29/13 1:15 PM, Roman Rakus wrote:
On 07/29/2013 05:06 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 7/29/13 10:55 AM, Roman Rakus wrote:
I didn't take a look on where the problem could be, but it is discussed on
stackoverflow [1].
Looks like return builtin falsely ex
On 7/29/13 1:15 PM, Roman Rakus wrote:
> On 07/29/2013 05:06 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 7/29/13 10:55 AM, Roman Rakus wrote:
>>> I didn't take a look on where the problem could be, but it is discussed on
>>> stackoverflow [1].
>>>
>>> Looks like return builtin falsely exit execution of while loop
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 01:15:59PM +0300, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> >> while :;do ( while :;do break 2; done);echo foo;done
> >>
> >> Should this raise an error? is the break in a loop context? what's a
> >> loop context?
The break occurs in a subshell, which means it cannot communicate what
I presum
On 2013-07-30 13:15, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> There are 2 loop levels in my example, but break only exit the subshell.
Yes, that's what I was saying. I think this should only exit the subshell
(although I'd like to see break and its family returning errors when you are
trying to operate on more loop
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-07-30 12:45, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Chris Down wrote:
>> > On 2013-07-30 12:11, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>> >> what about things like this: foo () ( return 1; )
>> >
>> > Except in this case, the return
On 2013-07-30 12:45, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Chris Down wrote:
> > On 2013-07-30 12:11, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> >> what about things like this: foo () ( return 1; )
> >
> > Except in this case, the return has a valid context. I don't see how it's
> > really
> > co
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-07-30 12:11, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>> what about things like this: foo () ( return 1; )
>
> Except in this case, the return has a valid context. I don't see how it's
> really
> comparable to the represented case.
It's a return in a su
On 2013-07-29 17:05, Chris Down wrote:
> On 29 Jul 2013 17:00, "Roman Rakus" wrote:
> >
> > I didn't take a look on where the problem could be, but it is discussed
> on stackoverflow [1].
> >
> > Looks like return builtin falsely exit execution of while loop instead of
> function.
>
> Unless I'm r
On 2013-07-30 12:11, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> what about things like this: foo () ( return 1; )
Except in this case, the return has a valid context. I don't see how it's really
comparable to the represented case.
pgpeaKMNUypTl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Roman Rakus wrote:
> On 07/29/2013 05:06 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>>
>> On 7/29/13 10:55 AM, Roman Rakus wrote:
>>>
>>> I didn't take a look on where the problem could be, but it is discussed
>>> on
>>> stackoverflow [1].
>>>
>>> Looks like return builtin falsely exit
16 matches
Mail list logo
