https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525 Marcus Meissner changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com |werner@novell.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525 User gfarrell@netspeed.com.au added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525#c2 --- Comment #2 from Geoff Farrell 2008-10-16 03:52:39 MDT --- man bash lists the syntax as: case word in [ [(] pattern [ | pattern ] ... ) list ;; ] ... esac This shows that each set of 'pattern' list statements must end with a double semicolon, bracketed top and bottom (or left and right) with 'case' and 'esac' keywords respectively. It does not grant any exemption for the last list to _Not_ have the double semicolon. I know that bash currently works without it, but that is no guarantee that this will be the case forever. It may just 'happen' to work that way now; it may not be by deliberate design. If bash falls back to its intended behavior some time in the future, your program code will crash. To see the fickleness of bash code, enter the following text in a script called 'test-esac' and run: sh -n test-esac [code] #!/bin/bash # test-esac - tests effect of not having a double-semicolon pair before an esac keyword TEXT1="Text 1 printed" TEXT2="Text 2 printed" Input=$1 # Get command line parameter case $Input in text1) echo -n "Input was $Input. "; echo "$TEXT1" ;; text2) echo -n "Input was $Input. "; echo $TEXT2 esac [/code] You will see the syntax error, indicating that bash expects the double-semicolon before 'esac'. You will also see the syntax error go away if you insert the double semicolon before 'esac'. The same script - as you point out - works when laid out in a multi-line arrangement. Programmers shouldn't rely on non-deliberate (ie, possibly accidental) behavior and undocumented syntax; that is inviting problems down the track. It's best to stick to the documented syntax. This wasn't the only script that I filed a bug report on (there were 23 in total). Most of the other maintainers simply fixed it; some even said thanks. You were the only one to challenge why I suggested the change. In the time it took to write your reply, you could have simply typed two semicolons in two places in the script, and clicked on 'fixed' here. I wasn't trying to be the fly in the ointment; I was only trying to help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525 User gfarrell@netspeed.com.au added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525#c4 --- Comment #4 from Geoff Farrell 2008-10-16 04:19:15 MDT --- You probably can't make it produce a syntax error, not now at least. But who knows in six months time? The bash programmer makes a small change to the code, and ... (well, all bets are off). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525 User gfarrell@netspeed.com.au added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435525#c6 --- Comment #6 from Geoff Farrell 2008-10-16 05:00:25 MDT --- So what does POSIX say about my one-liner 'test-esac'? I really don't wish to drag this out. I was simply going on what was in 'man bash'. If the maintainers don't want to make the changes, then that's fine by me. As I said, I was only trying to be helpful. I didn't expect that such a trivial change would generate so much heat. In the end, I think you could be confusing me with somebody who cares much about this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.