Package: bash
Version: 5.1-2+deb11u1
In the man page for bash we see the line,
“-- A -- signals the end of options and disables further option processing. Any
arguments after the -- are treated as filenames and arguments. An argument of -
is equivalent to --.”
I claim that the sentence “Any arguments after the -- are treated as filenames
and arguments.” is strange and should be rewritten or dropped.
I see two main logical interpretations of this sentence:
(1) *For each argument 𝑥 after --, 𝑥 is treated as a filename and an argument
simultaneously.* This can be expressed more succinctly without any loss of
information: *For each argument 𝑥 after --, 𝑥 is treated as a filename.* This
implies the original formulation as follows. Take any 𝑥 after --. By the
succinct formulation, 𝑥 is treated as a filename. By assumption, 𝑥 is an
argument. By default (as this has not been stated otherwise for the option --),
arguments are also treated as arguments, so 𝑥 is also treated as an argument.
Together, 𝑥 is treated as a filename and an argument. Q.E.D.
(2) *For each argument 𝑥 after --, 𝑥 is treated as a filename, or 𝑥 is treated
as an argument.* This is a tautology, which you see as follows. Take any 𝑥
after --. By default (as this has not been stated otherwise for the option
--), arguments are also treated as arguments, so 𝑥 is treated as an argument.
Therefore, 〈any claim〉 or 𝑥 is treated as an or argument. The term 〈any claim〉
can be arbitrary; in particular, *𝑥 is treated as a filename* would do. Q.E.D.
Summarizing, in case (1) the sentence can be shortened and in case (2) the
sentence can be dropped, both without loss of information. Of course, assuming
that the authors of the document really wish to say what they are saying.
We ask for the description of `--` to be rewritten clearly and succinctly.
Gratefully,
AlMa
