Re: syntax error while parsing a case command within `$(...)'

[Andreas Schwab]

On Feb 17 2021, Koichi Murase wrote:

> Yes, that's what I wanted to claim by the above example, that is, XCU
> 2.4 isn't the (most) essential point for the reason that `fi esac' or
> `fi fi` is a valid construct. The above example is just a
> counter-example against explaining `fi esac` by solely XCU 2.4.

XCU 2.4 only explains when words are to be recognized as reserved words
(the lexer part of parsing).  Only because of these rules the `fi esac'
example contains two consecutive reserved words.  The grammar depends on
having these rules in place, and then applies more rules on the
placement of tokens.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510  2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."