[pacman-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Changing [ to [[ and (( - Part Two - Amended

[Cedric Staniewski]

Allan McRae wrote:
> I have looked at the two patches and the good news is that I can spot
> nothing wrong!  I just have a few comments about style that I would like
> to discuss.
> 
> [...]
> 
> My suggestion is that any thing with text (i.e. not a pure variable) is
> quoted.  I know this is excessive in some cases (e.g. the last case) but
> the only exception I would be happy with is tests that are pure paths
> with only added "/" (e.g. $startdir/$file).  Even then, maybe quotes
> would be nicer...  I am happy to be debated on this.
> 

To quote myself [1]:
> In my opinion, it is often not obvious whether they are required or not
> which is why I tended to use more quotes than actually were needed. I am
> fairly familiar with quoting by now and can use both "quoting styles",
> but I think it would probably be a good idea to decide for one. Using
> just as much quotes as required would be a little bit shorter, but using
> quotes `where possible` may be a little bit more foolproof.

Meaning that I am fine with quoting strings generally.

[1]
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-November/010115.html


> I wonder if the tests of return values should explicitly test for "== 0"
> or "!= 0". e.g. these test have become less clear to me when I read the
> code.
> 
> -    if [ $ret -gt 0 ]; then
> +    if (( ret )); then
> 
> -    elif [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
> +    elif (( ret )); then
> 

Yep, sounds reasonable, especially since we already explicitly test all
(or at least many) other non-boolean variables.