Path: csiph.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail From: worley@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug Subject: Command substitution Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 21:44:45 -0400 Lines: 23 Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87mu5kgbxu.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1591148692 2449 209.51.188.17 (3 Jun 2020 01:44:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu To: bug-bash@gnu.org Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcastmailservice.net; s=20180828_2048; t=1591148687; bh=Ty427rlz5MSIomnLKLUXoqYCptjhJ3VcRW5gWsTQA5Q=; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date: Message-ID; b=VDeQ20U8sgUHdOIyDH8fY8W5CF74HUxGraGTceDW2JesBS+BKvSCrFLhIEdm3bOy7 8hVnKOm5CDWtFECfXeBp+zzwkhOstsbtmz44yg2Y6Zicb7x/MznEfRn7YKKUN6LSmc MxnrRgRX4721Fy0uGPVZSOW8en/P5Oa9jXgMXntkxlq7Lw+B0MlhnQlNT45B5/M9A5 K07SkAVHffiaYOX0PVNNpa2IiXzkWewHuXAE9Za8u68F3bV+VmNNRW33d5rqUSoPBO Nc+2nzwZpi7EZktrKfGFMOxGCmfzkQGGBLdNzyraDld8im4naY/HIa9dBKokaD/PEm rjAkvSfODre9Q== X-Xfinity-VMeta: sc=0.00;st=legit X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f Received-SPF: permerror client-ip=2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:36; envelope-from=worley@alum.mit.edu; helo=resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/02 21:44:48 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = ??? X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-bash@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <87mu5kgbxu.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:16355 Naively, I expect that FOO="$( command2 )" command1 $FOO has the same effect as command1 $( command2 ) and FOO="$( command2 )" command1 "$FOO" has the same effect as command1 "$( command2 )" Has anyone pushed the boundaries of this and can tell me whether there are gotchas? Dale