On Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 1:36 PM Greg Wooledge <g...@wooledge.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 01:15:16PM +0200, alex xmb ratchev wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 8:09 PM Greg Wooledge <g...@wooledge.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 12:33:07AM +1000, Martin D Kealey wrote: > [...] > > > Well in any case, the behavior you wanted is not reliable across > shells, > > > nor even across versions of bash. > > > > > > > me ? > > I was replying to Martin Kealey. "You" in that sentence referred to him. > ah k , thxx > i dont have interest in supporting not newest versions ... 4.4 ? uh > > not my case , nor would i support it > > The "non-local break/continue" that Martin wanted doesn't work in 5.2 > either. > > > > > unicorn:~$ bash-4.4 foo > > > 1 > > > f > > > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' > loop > > > 2 > > > f > > > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' > loop > > > 3 > > > f > > > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' > loop > > unicorn:~$ bash-5.2 foo > 1 > f > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' loop > 2 > f > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' loop > 3 > f > foo: line 1: break: only meaningful in a `for', `while', or `until' loop > > > I used 4.3 and 4.4 in my demonstration because that was where the > behavior changed. Everything *before* 4.3 presumably works like 4.3, > and everything *after* 4.4 presumably works like 4.4, though I didn't > test all the versions. Only a tiny handful. > > I showed exactly how I ran my demonstration, so you could have repeated > it using your own bash version to see whether it supported the non-local > break/continue. > > But I guess now you don't have to, since I just did it for you. > cool =)) >
