From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Mar 5 21:33:22 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dt051n0b.san.rr.com (dt051n0b.san.rr.com [204.210.32.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0505137B847 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 21:33:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from gorean.org (doug@master [10.0.0.2]) by dt051n0b.san.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA07485; Sun, 5 Mar 2000 21:33:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Message-ID: <38C3431D.DDA29E2@gorean.org> Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 21:33:17 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT-0302 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: W Gerald Hicks Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: empty lists in for References: <38C2B805.EA899C32@gorean.org> <20000305204115E.jhix@mindspring.com> <38C33A03.A55DEFAF@gorean.org> <20000305212148X.jhix@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG W Gerald Hicks wrote: > To me, changing it right now on the eve of -release > would be gratuitous. Later I would be fine with it. > > I still prefer /bin/sh being able to handle an empty > literal list but would yield to the desires of others. I think you misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting any changes, unless the fact that our /bin/sh DOES handle the non-existent list case breaks something. My feeling in general is that the more POSIX compliant we are the better, but I don't really know what the standard says about this. Doug -- "Welcome to the desert of the real." - Laurence Fishburne as Morpheus, "The Matrix" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message