3 ms·
IMO, the year is 2022, almost 2023. Trying to do POSIX sh is tying both arms behind your back. Set the shebang to #!/bin/bash, and now you've got at least got o
by deathanatos 4y ago
IMO, the year is 2022, almost 2023. Trying to do POSIX sh is tying both arms behind your back. Set the shebang to #!/bin/bash, and now you've got at least got only one arm tied behind your back.
If your environment somehow lacks bash, consider that the bug, and get bash.
Or, untie both arms, and use a language that's not going to take every opportunity to stab you in the back with subtle idiocies dating from the last millennium.
(But I do agree that, if you're going to put down a bash-ism, it's bash, not POSIX sh.)
- chasil 4y agoMay I suggest that you attempt to convince The Austin Group/Open Group of your position, to update what was originally known as the POSIX.2 shell standard? https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V... http://www.opengroup.org/austin/faq.html http://www.opengroup.org/austin/faq.html
- _dain_ 4y agoposix is a messy codification of a situation that existed at a particular point in time. it didn't arrive ex nihilo. if enough people decide to just use bash, then that will be the new standard. we don't have to ask for some committee's permission to advance.
- chasil 4y agoBash as itself, or POSIXLY_CORRECT Bash? It does have something of a split personality on that question.
- SSLy 4y agoThe only entity that still respects the Open Group is the sod submitting the SUS/POSIX submissions for macOS on behalf of Apple.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y ago> Or, untie both arms, and use a language that's not going to take every opportunity to stab you in the back with subtle idiocies dating from the last millennium. Are you still referring to bash here?