Re: portability of positional parameters after $9?

[Paul Eggert]

Alexandre Duret-Lutz <address@hidden> writes:

> years I've been convinced that the only safe way to access
> positional parameters past $9 was to shift them first.  I can't
> recall why.  I'm wondering whether this is a myth of mine,

It's not a myth.  The 7th edition shell behaved that way; it reported
an error if given "${10}".  Solaris 10 /bin/sh still acts that way:

$ set 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
$ echo ${10}
bad substitution