Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!boulder!stan!dce
From: dce@Solbourne.COM (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: sh syntax question
Message-ID: <851@marvin.Solbourne.COM>
Date: 20 Apr 89 22:19:32 GMT
References: <8283@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: dce@Solbourne.com (David Elliott)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Solbourne Computer Inc., Longmont, Colorado
Lines: 32

In article <8283@ihlpf.ATT.COM> lukas@ihlpf.UUCP (Lukas,J.) writes:
>Can anyone explain why this syntax:
>
>	for file; do
>
>works fine with ksh, but fails with sh with a message like:
>
>	unexpected ;

The likely answer is that sh just wasn't written to handle this case.
Either the ksh parser works differently, or someone working with
ksh decided that this was a bug and fixed it.  I think you'll find
that

	for file
	do

works just fine.

>The syntax:
>
>	for file in $@; do
>
>works fine with both ksh and sh. TIA

The term "works fine" is a relative term (high horse time again).
If you use $@ and not "$@", it's kind of like wearing a condom
made of cheesecloth.

-- 
David Elliott		dce@Solbourne.COM
			...!{boulder,nbires,sun}!stan!dce