Date: 21 Aug 2002 04:17:30 -0400 From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-stable-local@be-well.no-ip.com> To: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: minor annoyances Message-ID: <443ct8mxr9.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <200208210643.g7L6hhr23559@uitm.zenon.net> References: <200208210643.g7L6hhr23559@uitm.zenon.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrey Alekseyev <uitm@zenon.net> writes: > Well, shame on me. I always thought it works just like (aaa &) && bbb > which has the right effect. So I assume, that was a parsing bug fixed > which previously had been allowing the incorrect notation. Back to fix > my scripts (fortunately I wasn't using that bad syntax much:) It isn't clear what you mean by "right effect". If it works, '(aaa &) && bb' can't mean anything other than 'aaa & bb'. The "bb" always executes, regardless of the result of "aaa". To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?443ct8mxr9.fsf>