On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> wrote:
Thanks for the report. This was discussed by the austin group back in 2014 > and resulted in Posix interpretation 888. > Thanks for the pointer. Looking at that interpretation ( http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=888), I noticed that it includes one case that bash is not handling correctly: If there are no positional parameters, the expansion of @ shall generate zero fields […] however, if the expansion is embedded within a word which contains one or more other parts that expand to a quoted null string, these null string(s) shall still produce an empty field […] The provided example is: set --printf '[%s]\n' foo ''"$@"*[foo] []* (Bash just prints [foo]). The attached exp9.sub and exp.right could be used for testing all the examples from the interpretation if desired. I removed the test cases that included undefined behavior.
exp.right
Description: Binary data
exp9.sub
Description: Binary data
