Date: Sun, 23 Jul 1995 14:43:23 -0500 From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make weirdness Message-ID: <199507231943.OAA00535@bonkers.taronga.com> References: <199507131123.EAA05266@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <199507131123.EAA05266@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>, Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > * ....and overlooked that it was not quite correct shell syntax (do should not > * be followed by a semicolon). I wonder why the old make let it pass though. >So, why didn't the old sh complain? Of course I dunno. The old sh didn't complain because an empty statement is a perfectly valid statement. I did some checking: it looks like complaining about this syntax is a System-V-ism. IMHO ignoring empty statements is the right thing to do, from a language perspective. 1.1.5.1: $ ; ; ; ; ; $ BSDI: $ ; ; ; ; ; $ 2.0.5 (freefall): $ ; ; ; ; ; Syntax error: ";" unexpected OSF/1 (Digital UNIX): $ ; ; ; ; ; $ SunOS 4.1.3: $ ; ; ; ; ; syntax error: `newline or ;' unexpected Solaris: $ ; ; ; ; ; syntax error: `newline or ;' unexpected SVR3: $ ; ; ; ; ; syntax error: `newline or ;' unexpected SVR4: # ; ; ; ; ; syntax error: `newline or ;' unexpected
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199507231943.OAA00535>