Re: Command substitution with null bytes generates warning

[Linda Walsh]

Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Bash has only three choices that I can think of: it can silently drop the
> NUL bytes  behavior), it can drop ALL of the bytes and return an
> error, or it can drop the NUL bytes with a warning (4.4 behavior).
>   
now who is being disingenuous?  It was silent not just in 4.3, but in all
previous versions.   There is far more weight behind the being silent (the
unix design philosophy) than being needlessly noisy. 

>  Calling that an "illegally modified input" is disingenuous.

Claiming it needed a warning for something that is "impossible" is
equally ridiculous.  Why not warn that bash can't do your laundry?
If bash is to warn about everything it ***can't*** do, it would be
unusable.  So why make a special case to warn about the "impossible"?