On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Davide Baldini <baldiniebald...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/27/12 05:04, DJ Mills wrote: >> Think of regular here-doc (with an unquoted word) as being treated the >> same way as a double-quoted string > > Thank you Mills, of course I can understand it _now_, after having hit > the problem, but my point is different: the description of a program's > details should be first of all in its main point of reference, its > manual. I'm a bit surprised that while the developers elite perfectly > know the correct details, nobody is going to review a misleading manual > being a reference for the most of us.
The manual seems quite clear: "If word is unquoted, all lines of the here-document are subjected to parameter expansion, command substitution, and arithmetic expansion. In the latter case, the character sequence \<newline> is ignored, and \ must be used to quote the characters \, $, and `." Maybe you could point the part of the manual that mislead you into thinking that " here doc are supposed to expand with no special exceptions" so that it can be corrected?
