Re: [PATCH libgpiod v2 2/4] tools: tests: use "$@" instead of $*

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 07:39:10AM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 07:17:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 08:44:20PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 02:02:34PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:

...

> > > >  assert_fail() {
> > > > -	$* || return 0
> > > > -	fail " '$*': command did not fail as expected"
> > > > +	"$@" || return 0
> > > > +	fail " '$@': command did not fail as expected"
> > > >  }
> > >
> > > Ironically, shellcheck doesn't like the '$@' in the fail string[1], so you
> > > should use $* there.
> >
> > But why does it do like this?
> 
> Read the link[1].

Okay, this is only for some debug / error messages. Still if one wants to have
clear understanding on what has been passed to some function, $* is not a
correct option. Also note the single quotes, shouldn't that protect from the
arguments loss?

> Because $@ is an array being used to build a string, and that may not
> work the way you expect.

I think it's the opposite, $* works in a way I do not expect :-)

> In this case $* is clearer as that has already
> been concatenated.

...loosing information about which word refers to which argument, yes.

> [1] https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC2145

TL;DR: I consider this is still a bug in shellcheck. But if you rely on the
tool as on the ruleset carved in stone, I will not die. Just a remark to
myself "even honourable tools may also be broken".

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko