Chet Ramey wrote:
As Eric said, the other parts of the Posix description make it clear that the `ignoring set -e' status is inherited by subshells.
----
The original POSIX standard made this clear -- in that
it was only a failure of a 'simple' command that resulted' in
an err-exit'.
Since a subshell is not a 'simple command', it would not qualify
just like ((n=0)) isn't a simple command, so shouldn't trigger an
error exit...(but has in some recent versions)....
Is that fixed in bash now?
