with <t90c2e$cqs$1@dont-email.me> Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 22.06.2022 14:50, Eric Pozharski wrote:
>> with <t8rk4k$1or$1@dont-email.me> Janis Papanagnou wrote:

*SKIP*
>>>> since "${slvr[@]}" is the standard to access array elements, and
>>>> filenames with spaces (etc.) would have issues (in ksh and bash).
>> True, (abstract) you can write bash in zsh. What's (personal) your
>> point?
> Oh, it's just that [in ksh, bash] the $slvr in rmdir $slvr expands
> to a string of elements separated also by e.g. whitespace. That's
> strictly speaking not relevant in a specific case where names like
> W[0-5][0-9] are expanded. But in general [in ksh, bash, and I'd
> suppose also in zsh] if populating an array slvr=( ... ) to keep the
> argument structure intact we'd better use "${slvr[@]}" to preserve the
> argument structure of the array elements and not get undesired word
> splitting. Another point is that [in ksh, bash] $slvr would not
> expand the whole array but only the first element.

Well, instead walls of text I would like to see references to
specifications (or something) that clearly sets order of expansions of
bash as _standard_. Otherwise, it's just a choice that has been made
decades ago and now it's kept because backward compatibility.

> $ a=( "A B" "C D" )
> $ printf "'%s'\n" $a
> 'A'
> 'B'
> $ printf "'%s'\n" "$a"
> 'A B'
> $ printf "'%s'\n" "${a[@]}"
> 'A B'
> 'C D'

You point to "structure". But true difference is:

$ foo=( aa bb cc )
$ echo $foo
aa

Now, what 'rmdir' will see exactly?

> That was my point. (And a question whether zsh behaves differently if
> compared to ksh, bash; as it seems to do as I've just tried.) So for
> folks who are not residing solely in zsh it might be better to use the
> more portable syntax that zsh also supports. For zsh-only users my
> point is probably irrelevant.

Good. Now you (and hopefully others) realize there is world without
bash. My job here is done. Farewell... (and I'm doing that thing)

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On 23.06.2022 11:28, Eric Pozharski wrote:
> *SKIP*
>>>>> "${slvr[@]}"
>
> Well, instead walls of text I would like to see references to
> specifications (or something) that clearly sets order of expansions of
> bash as _standard_.

It's no "standard" in the sense of POSIX (if you meant that).
Last time I looked there's still no arrays supported by POSIX
but the positional parameters.

> Otherwise, it's just a choice that has been made
> decades ago and now it's kept because backward compatibility.

It's a feature (with a specific syntax) that had indeed been
introduced decades ago. That syntax for arrays, initialization
a=( ... ) and referencing the data in a structured way "${a[@]}",
has been adopted by a couple shells, and zsh seems to support
that as well. So it became a quasi-standard if you want to use
arrays (beyond the positional parameters) in those shells that
support them.

But zsh has made a couple other features and expansion decisions
that are not only non-standard but also unique to zsh. (I'm fine
with that.)

>
> Good. Now you (and hopefully others) realize there is world without
> bash. My job here is done. Farewell... (and I'm doing that thing)

Not sure what job you've actually done, but have a nice farewell.

Janis