[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: feature request: more complete set -e
From: |
Chet Ramey |
Subject: |
Re: feature request: more complete set -e |
Date: |
Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:33:18 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) |
Marc Weber wrote:
> This is my point: I'd like to tell bash: Whenever running an executable
> assume that if it returns a non zero exit status that's a unforeseen
> exception. And in this case don't continue as usual but abort and return
> non zero exit status yourself. set -e comes close.
You're talking about making bash exit when a command fails even when
not in a command execution context. The example above is a word
expansion context. `set -e' acts in a command execution context.
Nor are you talking only about executables; you mean builtins too,
just to make that clear.
Your proposal would have bash exit on
echo `expr $var - 1`
if `var' happened to be 1. (That construct is very common in older shell
code.)
I don't think that extension would be useful enough to be worth the
effort.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU chet@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
- feature request: more complete set -e, Marc Weber, 2009/06/22
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Chet Ramey, 2009/06/23
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Marc Weber, 2009/06/24
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e,
Chet Ramey <=
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Marc Weber, 2009/06/28
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Greg Wooledge, 2009/06/29
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Chet Ramey, 2009/06/29
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Bob Proulx, 2009/06/29
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Marc Weber, 2009/06/30
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Greg Wooledge, 2009/06/30
- Re: feature request: more complete set -e, Chet Ramey, 2009/06/30