On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 03:28:35PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Looks obviously correct to me. Thanks. > I had a look at our other shell scripts and it looks as if there is only > one more candidate for this issue: git-bisect.sh has a couple of 'for arg > in "$@"' constructs. But from a cursory look, it appears that none of > these "$@" can be empty lists because at least one parameter is passed to > those functions (check_expected_revs() is only called from bisect_state() > with 1 or 2 parameters, bisect_skip() makes no sense without parameters, > and bisect_state() has another for loop if it got 2 parameters). > > So I think we're fine. I'm not even sure that: for arg in "$@" is a problem if "$@" is empty. The issue here is the eval, in which we generate syntactically funny code and expect the shell to interpret it. It's possible a shell could get the more mundane case wrong, but I'd expect most to get it right. I did some brief grepping around myself, but didn't find any other interesting cases. That doesn't mean much, though; tracking down what content actually makes it into some of our "eval" calls would be pretty time-consuming. So I'd rely on people like Armin to report failures in the test suite. -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