-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Chet Ramey on 4/8/2009 6:44 AM:
> I prefer
>
> for name [ [in [word ...] ] ; ] do
Yes, that looks nice. Meanwhile, I've raised the html render bug with the
Austin group:
https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mail.tpl?CALLER=index.tpl
Eric Blake wrote:
> You missed word... (the ... is important). To keep it on one line, I'd
> represent the bash syntax as:
>
> for name [ in [ name ... ] ; | ; ] do
>
> to show that bash supports four varints: 'in ;', 'in name... ;', ';', or
> blank.
I prefer
for name [ [in [word ...] ] ; ] d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Eric Blake on 4/8/2009 6:10 AM:
> The corresponding link in POSIX 2008 is:
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html#tag_18_09_04
>
> although the expository listing in that section is misleading.
I spo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Reuben Thomas on 4/6/2009 3:57 PM:
> The man page says:
>
> for name [ in word ] ; do list ; done
>
> which conflicts with the POSIX syntax definition, given in
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/95399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html
The syntax for the "for" command is misleading, as although correct for
bash, it is not POSIX-compliant.
I am using GNU bash, version 3.2.48(1)-release (i486-pc-linux-gnu)
The man page says:
for name [ in word ] ; do list ; done
which conflicts with the POSIX syntax definition, given in
http
