Re: IFS field splitting doesn't conform with POSIX

[Greg Wooledge]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 11:52:06AM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> Not to mention the small detail that the Internal Field Separator is
> not a *separator*, but a terminator (with certain exceptions).

POSIX itself admits that the name is confusing.  From sh(1posix):

RATIONALE
       [...]
       The  name  IFS  was originally an abbreviation of ``Input Field Separa‐
       tors''; however, this name is misleading as the IFS characters are  ac‐
       tually  used  as  field terminators.