Re: case statement: wrong behaviour of the ";;&" operator

2019-01-26 Thread Robert Elz 
Date:Sat, 26 Jan 2019 06:30:05 +0100
From:Norman Krebs 
Message-ID:  


  |     Following the man page, the ';;&' operator should cause testing the 
_next_
  |     pattern: '2)' only and not _all_ following patterns.

Badly worded manual.   What it means is "pretend this match didn't happen,
even though the command list has been executed, and continue scanning
the patterns in the case statement looking for another match, then do its
list, and after that, whatever its terminating operator says to do".   But that
is quite a mouthfull ...

kre

Re: "return" should not continue script execution, even if used inappropriately

2019-01-26 Thread Robert Elz 
Date:Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:41:47 -0800
From:don fong 
Message-ID:  


First, thanks for not top posting.  This is much better.

  | no.  a discussion thread can have multiple points.

Of course, but that is not what I meant.   By "the point"
I did not mean the point of the thread as such (as this
would not be it, as the original question needed a different
answer) but when it gets to "how to do this" the point is
to provide a reasonable answer.

  | since the bash FAQ is dismissing a valuable technique,
  | one that ought to be more widely adopted.

That is where we disagree.   I don't think it is valuable
at all, and shouldn't be adopted at all.   That is, I think
the FAQ is correct.

And we know that you disagree with that, there is no need
to repeat it over and over.

kre