Jim Meyering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is the following behavior intended?
>
> I was surprised by the behavior of bash/zsh/ash/dash/pdksh,
> yet Solaris 5.9's /bin/sh does what I expected:
>
> # Solaris 5.9's /bin/sh
> $ echo a; (set -e; false; echo foo) && echo b
> a
>
> # Yet bash/zsh/ash do this:
> $ echo a; (set -e; false; echo foo) && echo b
> a
> foo
> b
>
> The POSIX spec for set's -e option says the following,
> so it all comes down to how you interpret being ``part of
> an AND or OR list'':
>
> -e When this option is on, if a simple command fails for any of the
> reasons listed in Section 2.8.1 (on page 46) or returns an exit status
> value >0, and is not part of the compound list following a while,
> until, or if keyword, and is not a part of an AND or OR list, and is
> not a pipeline preceded by the ! reserved word, then the shell shall
> immediately exit.
>
> My take was to consider the subshell commands in isolation,
> where I expected the `set -e' to take effect. There, the simple
> command `false' fails, so I expected that subshell to exit nonzero
> and not print `foo'.
Bash, and every other modern shell, interprets the subshell as being
part of the AND list, and disables the effect of `set -e'.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
( ``Discere est Dolere'' -- chet )
Live...Laugh...Love
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
_______________________________________________
Bug-bash mailing list
Bug-bash@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash
