Re: Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-11 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
middle ground between the two concerns.  I understand that, ultimately, you have to chose the solution that you feel is the best balance overall. Thanks for your maintenance of a critical piece of modern infrastructure! -- John On Monday, March 10, 2025 at 09:51:44 AM EDT, Chet Ramey wrote:

Re: Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-10 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
On Monday, March 10, 2025 at 12:38:38 PM EDT, Zachary Santer wrote: > Another alternative would be for bash to print a warning whenever it > encounters this syntax. There are precedents for this kind of behavior in languages like perl which issue warnings for deprecated features for several rel

Re: Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-10 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
be documented here would serve both aims? -- John On Monday, March 10, 2025 at 09:23:08 AM EDT, Chet Ramey wrote: On 3/7/25 12:23 PM, John Wiersba wrote: > You're discouraging it's use by not documenting it.  BTW, according to > those links below, apparently zsh documen

Re: Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-07 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
Thanks, Greg!!! On Friday, March 7, 2025 at 01:19:28 PM EST, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 17:23:57 +, John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell wrote: >    - Is our conversation being recorded somewhere in the gnu archives, so >that I can l

Re: Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-07 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
constructs? - Is our conversation being recorded somewhere in the gnu archives, so that I can link to it in my stackoverflow question?  Otherwise, I'll just clip quotes from it to paste there. -- John On Friday, March 7, 2025 at 12:03:18 PM EST, Chet Ramey wrote: On 3/7/25 9:23 A

Bug: please document extended and alternate for loop syntax

2025-03-07 Thread John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell
at https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/306940/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-do-keyword-in-bash-for-loops/306944#306944 Thanks!-- John Wiersba

Re: OLDPWD unset when bash starts

2015-11-26 Thread John Wiersba
Thanks, Chet! From: Chet Ramey To: John Wiersba ; "bug-bash@gnu.org" Cc: chet.ra...@case.edu Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 12:41 PM Subject: Re: OLDPWD unset when bash starts On 11/18/15 2:44 PM, John Wiersba wrote: > Why does bash clear OLDPWD when a ch

OLDPWD unset when bash starts

2015-11-19 Thread John Wiersba
From: jrw32...@yahoo.com To: bug-bash@gnu.org,b...@packages.debian.org Subject: OLDPWD unset when bash starts Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: x86_64 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64' -DCONF_OSTYPE

OLDPWD unset when bash starts

2015-11-18 Thread John Wiersba
1.2(1)-release (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Can bash be fixed to preserve the value of any OLDPWD in its initial environment, like it does with PWD? Thanks! -- John Wiersba