Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chet Ramey wrote: >> I already explained that bash follows csh as closely as possible >> in its history expansion implementation. > > Well, it doesn't:
Sure it does: in your examples, bash tries history expansion in exactly the same cases as tcsh. Where they differ is in escape/quote handling, since bash comes from the Bourne shell tradition, and tcsh comes from the completely incompatible C shell tradition. It's not at all surprising that merging behaviors from these two disparate shells would result in some rought edges. > Either \ acts as an escape or it doesn't You would like that to be true, as would lots of other people. But the current behavior is too well-entrenched to change now without breaking lots of people's expectations, based on bash's past behavior. It's not going to change. You are free to patch your own copy of bash, or use a different shell that aims for self-consistency over historical consistency. paul
