syntax: got "}" can only be used to close a block on a seemingly normal block
#739
Assignees
Labels
Comments
|
Apparently, the "bug(?)" has to do with the "at" sign ( $ shfmt
=() {
echo "$@"
}
= Hello world\!
=() {
echo "$@"
}
= Hello world\!
$ |
|
Found a workaround (I just love the internet...): $ shfmt
@()
{
echo "$@"
}
@ Hello world\!
@()
{
echo "$@"
}
@ Hello world\!I'm still not sure why |
|
Interestingly, it's not only the "at" sign ( $ for i in @ + - = , ^; do echo; echo __ $i __; echo "$i() { echo yay; }" | shfmt; echo; done
__ @ __
<standard input>:1:17: "}" can only be used to close a block
__ + __
<standard input>:1:17: "}" can only be used to close a block
__ - __
-() { echo yay; }
__ = __
=() { echo yay; }
__ , __
,() { echo yay; }
__ ^ __
^() { echo yay; }
|
|
Thanks for the report! This might be a bug in the parser. I'd be happy to review a patch if you're up for looking into it :) |
mvdan
changed the title
"}" can only be used to close a block on a seemingly normal block"}" can only be used to close a block on a seemingly normal block
Actually, I'm not. The only reason I use this tool is because I'm forced to. One clear and present danger with tools like this is that they are often misused |
|
I'm not sure how to answer to that, so I won't :) |
|
I'll take a look at this @mvdan :) |
|
Sounds good! |
riacataquian
added a commit
to riacataquian/sh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 8, 2021
the lexer assumes an extglob token if any of the wildcards expressions
(such as `@`, and `+`) are succeeded by a left parenthesis but that
proves to be an issue if the wildcard is used as a function name.
example input:
```
$ cat in.sh
@() {
echo "$@";
}
```
`bash` and `gosh` comparison:
```
$ bash ./in.sh
hello
$ ./gosh in.sh
in.sh:5:1: "}" can only be used to close a block
```
given `in.sh`, gosh reports about a syntax error - this is because
a closing bracket is found while the lexer doesn't assume a function
block
fix the issue by assuming a function if:
* if the expression is found at the beginning of the statement or if its
preceded by a "function"
* if `(` is immediately succeeded by a `)` - although this is a valid
bash syntax, we'll operate on the likelihood that it is a function
fixes mvdan#739
riacataquian
added a commit
to riacataquian/sh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 8, 2021
the lexer assumes an extglob token if any of the wildcards expressions
(such as `@`, and `+`) are succeeded by a left parenthesis but that
proves to be an issue if the wildcard is used as a function name.
example input:
```
$ cat in.sh
@() {
echo "$@";
}
```
`bash` and `gosh` comparison:
```
$ bash ./in.sh
hello
$ ./gosh in.sh
in.sh:5:1: "}" can only be used to close a block
```
given `in.sh`, gosh reports about a syntax error - this is because
a closing bracket is found while the lexer isn't assuming a function
block
fix the issue by assuming a function if one of the conditions below is
true:
* if the expression is found at the beginning of the statement or if its
preceded by a "function"
* if `(` is immediately succeeded by a `)` - although this is a valid
bash syntax, we'll operate on the likelihood that it is a function
fixes mvdan#739
riacataquian
added a commit
to riacataquian/sh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 11, 2021
the lexer assumes an extglob token if any of the wildcards expressions
(such as `@`, and `+`) are succeeded by a left parenthesis but that
proves to be an issue if the wildcard is used as a function name.
example input:
```
$ cat in.sh
@() {
echo "$@";
}
```
`bash` and `gosh` comparison:
```
$ bash ./in.sh
hello
$ ./gosh in.sh
in.sh:5:1: "}" can only be used to close a block
```
given `in.sh`, gosh reports about a syntax error - this is because
a closing bracket is found while the lexer isn't assuming a function
block
fix the issue by assuming a function if one of the conditions below is
true:
* if the expression is found at the beginning of the statement or if its
preceded by a "function"
* if `(` is immediately succeeded by a `)` - although this is a valid
bash syntax, we'll operate on the likelihood that it is a function
fixes mvdan#739
riacataquian
added a commit
to riacataquian/sh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 11, 2021
the lexer assumes an extglob token if any of the wildcards expressions
(such as `@`, and `+`) are succeeded by a left parenthesis but that
proves to be an issue if the wildcard is used as a function name.
example input:
```
$ cat in.sh
@() {
echo "$@";
}
```
`bash` and `gosh` comparison:
```
$ bash ./in.sh
hello
$ ./gosh in.sh
in.sh:5:1: "}" can only be used to close a block
```
given `in.sh`, gosh reports about a syntax error - this is because
a closing bracket is found while the lexer isn't assuming a function
block
fix the issue by assuming a function if one of the conditions below is
true:
* if the expression is found at the beginning of the statement or if its
preceded by a "function"
* if `(` is immediately succeeded by a `)` - although this is a valid
bash syntax, we'll operate on the likelihood that it is a function
fixes mvdan#739
riacataquian
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Dec 11, 2021
the lexer assumes an extglob token if any of the wildcards expressions
(such as `@`, and `+`) are succeeded by a left parenthesis but that
proves to be an issue if the wildcard is used as a function name.
example input:
```
$ cat in.sh
@() {
echo "$@";
}
```
`bash` and `gosh` comparison:
```
$ bash ./in.sh
hello
$ ./gosh in.sh
in.sh:5:1: "}" can only be used to close a block
```
given `in.sh`, gosh reports about a syntax error - this is because
a closing bracket is found while the lexer isn't assuming a function
block
fix the issue by assuming a function if one of the conditions below is
true:
* if the expression is found at the beginning of the statement or if its
preceded by a "function"
* if `(` is immediately succeeded by a `)` - although this is a valid
bash syntax, we'll operate on the likelihood that it is a function
fixes #739
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I'm struggling to understand what's wrong with this sample:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: