[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading
From: |
Sam Liddicott |
Subject: |
BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Mar 2011 16:12:31 -0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17pre) Gecko/20110322 Lanikai/3.1.10pre |
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i686
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -DP$ uname output:
Linux sojo 2.6.35-28-generic-pae #49-Ubuntu SMP Tue Mar 1 14:58:06 UTC
2011 i686 GNU/Linux
Machine Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Bash Version: 4.1
Patch Level: 5
Release Status: release
Description:
man page says:
BASH_SUBSHELL
Incremented by one each time a subshell or subshell
environment
is spawned. The initial value is 0.
This suggests that:
echo $BASH_SUBSHELL ; ( echo ) ; echo $BASH_SUBSHELL
would not give the same answer for BASH_SUBSHELL
Fix:
As it behaves more like a depth counter than a serial number
maybe it should say
BASH_SUBSHELL
Incremented by one in each nested subshell or subshell
evironment.
It is always 0 when $BASH_PID=$$
- BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading,
Sam Liddicott <=
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Chris F.A. Johnson, 2011/03/23
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Sam Liddicott, 2011/03/23
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Marc Herbert, 2011/03/24
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Greg Wooledge, 2011/03/24
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Marc Herbert, 2011/03/24
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Greg Wooledge, 2011/03/24
- Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading, Clark J. Wang, 2011/03/24