Re: syntax error while parsing a case command within `$(...)'

[Lawrence Velázquez]

> On Feb 16, 2021, at 10:42 PM, Dale R. Worley <worley@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Oğuz <oguzismailuysal@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> `;;' is optional for the last case item.
> 
> The manual page (for my version) says it's required. If, in some
> certain circumstances, it works without, that's nice.


It's also required by POSIX.

> But there's no commitment that it will work now, or in future
> releases.

The commitment is bash's claim to POSIX compliance. Outside of
command substitutions, the referenced construct currently works,
as POSIX requires. I expect this is by design. If it ceases to be
recognized in the future, then bash will have intentionally become
less compliant with POSIX, for no good reason.

>> `case x in esac' (without the linebreak) works fine outside the
>> command substitution.
> 
> The manual page (for my version) says that "esac" will be recognized
> in positions where a simple command may appear.

The 5.1 man page doesn't say that, or I can't find it, but it doesn't
matter because a simple command can't go immediately after that "in".

> If, in some other circumstances, it works, that's nice.


Recognition of "case x in esac" is also required by POSIX.

> But there's no commitment that it will work now, or in future
> releases.

See above.

> Now, if you want to advocate that it *should* always work, go ahead.
> But that's a feature request, not a bug report.

TO: Chet
SUBJECT: Feature request

Please do not make bash less POSIX-compliant for no good reason!

thx
vq