WG15 Defect Report Ref: 9945-2-102
Topic: shell "here-documents"


This is an approved interpretation of 9945-2:1993.

.

Last update: 1997-05-20


								9945-2-102

 _____________________________________________________________________________

	Topic:                shell "here-documents"
	Relevant Sections:    3.7.4

Defect Report:
-----------------------
	Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 15:09:54 -0800
	From: Fred Zlotnick <fred@mindcraft.com>

I would like to request an official, binding interpretation from
WG15 concerning the following point in ISO/IEC 9945-2:1993 (POSIX.2).

In the description of shell "here-documents" in POSIX.2 subclause 3.7.4,
the standard states in part:

	If no characters in word [the here-document delimiter] are
	quoted, all lines of the here-document shall be expanded for
	parameter expansion, command substitution and arithmetic
	expansion.  In this case, the backslash in the input will
	behave as the backslash inside double-quotes (see 3.2.3).
	However, the double-quote character (") will not be treated
	specially within a here-document, except when the double-quote
	appears within $( ), ` ` or ${ }.

The reference to section 3.2.3 refers (I believe) to the following text:

	The backslash shall retain its special meaning as an escape
	character (see 3.2.1) only when followed by one of the characters

		$   `   "   \   <newline>

If the here-document delimiter has not been quoted then does section 3.7.4
modify section 3.2.1 such that backslash is NOT an escape character when 
followed by the double-quote character?  That is, does the "However" clause
mean that '\"' should not be replaced with '"'?  For example, consider the
here-document:

	cat << EOF
	x\"y\"z
	EOF

The output of this here-document may be either

	x"y"z
or
	x\"y\"z

depending on how one reads the specification.  Thank you for your attention
to this matter.


Interpretation response
------------------------
The standard is unclear on this issue, and no conformance distinction can
be made between alternative implementations based on this.  This is being
referred to the sponsor.



Rationale:
None


Forwarded to Interpretations group: Mar 28 1995
Proposed resolution circulated: May 16th
Comments due: June 15th
Finalised: June 16th 1995