Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 16:57:15 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: hackers@freebsd.org, peter@bonkers.taronga.com Subject: Re: make weirdness Message-ID: <199507240657.QAA05582@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>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++; ---
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199507240657.QAA05582>