From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by coral.primenet.com.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA11637 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 07:59:23 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA03657; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 17:58:12 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 17:57:18 -0400 (EDT) From: segal@morgan.com (Morris M. Siegel) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 17:56:15 -0400 Message-Id: <9607221756.ZM3691@morgan.com> In-Reply-To: Zefram "Re: Bug in case stmt with '('" (Jul 22, 10:27pm) References: <17793.199607222127@stone.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10oct95) To: Zefram Subject: Re: Bug in case stmt with '(' Cc: hzoli@cs.elte.hu, zsh-users@math.gatech.edu, schaefer@nbn.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"9lAok.0.Gu.za_yn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-users@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/329 X-Loop: zsh-users@math.gatech.edu X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu On Jul 22, 10:27pm, Zefram wrote: > Subject: Re: Bug in case stmt with '(' > >I confess to having forgotten about the empty pattern. Using null syntax > >to implicitly denote the empty pattern in a script doesn't enhance readability > >in any case, and I think zsh syntax would be safer and less confusing if the > >empty pattern had to be denoted with the explicit syntax "()". > > Does POSIX require that a completely empty pattern be allowed? sh and > ksh don't like it, and zsh only allows it where there's a |. I don't > see any problem with producing a parse error, and requiring an explicit > empty pattern. > > -zefram >-- End of excerpt from Zefram To tell the truth, I have no idea what POSIX says about empty patterns. It seems that your views on the subject coincide with mine. -- Morrie Siegel