From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jul 24 00:02:01 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id AAA06511
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 00:02:01 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id AAA06486
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 00:01:25 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id QAA05582; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 16:57:15 +1000
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 16:57:15 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199507240657.QAA05582@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: hackers@freebsd.org, peter@bonkers.taronga.com
Subject: Re: make weirdness
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>>So, why didn't the old sh complain?  Of course I dunno.

>The old sh didn't complain because an empty statement is a perfectly valid
>statement. I did some checking: it looks like complaining about this syntax
>is a System-V-ism. IMHO ignoring empty statements is the right thing to do,
>from a language perspective.

It seems to be required by POSIX.  Bash complains.

>1.1.5.1:
>$ ; ; ; ; ;
>$

>BSDI:
>$ ; ; ; ; ;
>$

>2.0.5 (freefall):
>$ ; ; ; ; ;
>Syntax error: ";" unexpected

pre-2.0 through pre-2.2 (here)
$ ; ; ; ; ;
$
:-)

I use this change which was one of Jim Wilson's fixes for 1.1.5.  I wanted
it mainly for the TEOF handling.

---
*** parser.c~	Wed May 31 14:54:04 1995
--- parser.c	Wed May 31 14:54:17 1995
***************
*** 443,447 ****
--- 443,450 ----
  		break;
  	/* Handle an empty command like other simple commands.  */
+ 	case TSEMI:
  	case TNL:
+ 	/* Handle EOF like other simple commands, too.  */
+ 	case TEOF:
  	case TWORD:
  		tokpushback++;
---