On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 04:31:32PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> + cat >expected <<-EOF &&
> >> + hello.c: printf("Hello world.\n");
> >> + EOF
> >
> > Do you need to quote EOF to suppress expansion in the here document?
> > Both bash and dash seem to pass unknown backslash-escapes like "\n"
> > through unharmed, but I don't know if that is portable (they do both
> > munge known escapes like "\\", of course).
>
> I do not think that is strictly necessary, as we are not in the corner of
> non-portable echo behaviour anymore, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.
I think my brain is fried from using too many almost-shell-compatible
quoting languages. For example, unknown escape sequences in C get their
backslash removed and the sequence used literally (at least by gcc; I
couldn't find anything definite in C99 on this).
But actually, POSIX is quite clear that a backslash before anything
besides:
$ ` " \ <newline>
is just a backslash, and gets included literally.
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html