I guess we could approach this topic a different way (the statements below are
just my guesses and not based on any particular insight I have into the history
of this syntax):
1) If this alternate syntax is not actively supported, then that could be
stated as the reason why it is not (further)
On Monday, March 10, 2025, John Wiersba via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne
Again SHell wrote:
>
> The alternative is to have people, like me, stumbling on this
> undocumented syntax and spending a considerable amount of time trying to
> explore what it is and why it is undocumented.
>
And how is
