Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Sam Liddicott wrote:

> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: i686
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS:  -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686' 
> -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu' 
> -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -DP$ uname output: Linux 
> sojo 2.6.35-28-generic-pae #49-Ubuntu SMP Tue Mar 1 14:58:06 UTC 2011 i686 
> GNU/Linux
> Machine Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu
>
> Bash Version: 4.1
> Patch Level: 5
> Release Status: release
>
> Description:
>        man page says:
>
>        BASH_SUBSHELL
>              Incremented by one each time a subshell or subshell 
> environment
>              is spawned.  The initial value is 0.
>
>        This suggests that:
>
>        echo $BASH_SUBSHELL ; ( echo ) ; echo $BASH_SUBSHELL
>
>        would not give the same answer for BASH_SUBSHELL

   No, it suggests that:

echo $BASH_SUBSHELL ; ( echo $BASH_SUBSHELL )

   would not give the same answer for BASH_SUBSHELL

   In your example, the second "echo $BASH_SUBSHELL" is at the same
   depth as the first.

--
   Chris F.A. Johnson, <http://cfajohnson.com/>
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)