On 5/5/11 10:11 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> Also a POSIX violation:
>
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html#tag_18_06_02
>
> "The parameter name or symbol can be enclosed in braces, which are
> optional except for positional parameters with more than one digit or
> when parameter is followed by a character that could be interpreted as
> part of the name."
I agree with this interpretation, but the following sentence can be
interpreted as placing the burden on the shell programmer:
"When a positional parameter with more than one digit is specified, the
application shall enclose the digits in braces (see Parameter Expansion)."
Still, sh has required the braces since time immemorial. It makes no
sense that ash would have done it differently
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU c...@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
