Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!idallen
From: idallen@watmath.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.unix
Subject: Should shell command errors abandon subsequent commands?
Message-ID: <8389@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 20-Jul-84 01:15:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: watmath.8389
Posted: Fri Jul 20 01:15:34 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Jul-84 05:05:29 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 17

Consider the following set of shell (any shell) commands and give me
your opinion on what the best, ideal, most friendly behaviour would be:

   1.  nosuchcommand ; echo "Is this executed?"
   2.  ( nosuchcommand ; cmd ) ; echo "Is this executed?"
   3.  echo `nosuchcommand` "Is this executed?"
   4.  cmd nosuchglob* ; echo "Is this executed?"

Tell me what you think should ideally happen A) in interactive use at a
terminald and B) inside a shell file.  Does it make any difference
whether or not the commands are shell built-ins?  In a shell file,
would it make any difference if the commands were on separate lines?

[ For you CSH fans, try "echo nosuchglob* ; date" and
"/bin/echo nosuchglob* ; date" and see if you like the difference.]
-- 
        -IAN!  (Ian! D. Allen)      University of Waterloo