Tcl: constructing list with literal `$` in values - string

I'm trying to construct a (Tcl/)Tk command (to be associated with a widget's -command), that contains a variable that must be expanded at runtime.
In the original code this variable had a fixed name (so everything was simple and we used {...}):
Something like this:
proc addaction {widgid} {
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command {::actioncmd $::targetid}
}
addaction .pop1 # dynamic target is read from $::targetid
set ::targetid .foo ## now the action for the .pop1 widget targets .foo
set ::targetid .bar ## now the action for the .pop1 widget targets .bar
But now I would like to change this so we can replace the to-be-expanded variable with a fixed value in the "constructor".
The constraints are:
to keep the signature of addaction (therefore id must be optional)
not to touch ::actioncmd at all.
So I came up with something like this:
proc addaction {widgid {id $::targetid}} {
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command [list ::actioncmd $id]
}
addaction .pop1 # (as before)
addaction .pop2 .foo # static target for .pop2 is *always* .foo
Unfortunately my replacement code, doesn't work as the the $::targetid variable is no longer expanded. That is, if I trigger the widget's command I get:
$::targetid: no such object
Obviously the problem is with dynamically constructing a list that contains $args.
Or more likely: the subtle differences between lists and strings.
At least here's my test that shows that I cannot mimick {...} with [list ...]:
set a bar
set x {foo bar}
set y [list foo $a]
if { $x eq $y } {puts hooray} else {puts ouch}
# hooray, the two are equivalent, and both are 'foo bar'
set b {$bar}
set x {foo $bar}
set y [list foo $b]
if { $x eq $y } {puts hooray} else {puts ouch}
# ouch, the two are different, x is 'foo $bar' whereas y is 'foo {$bar}'
So: how can I construct a command foo $bar (with an expandable $bar) where $bar is expanded from a variable?
A naive solution could be:
proc addaction {widgid {id {}}} {
if { $id ne {} } {
set command [list ::actioncmd $id]
} else {
set command {::actioncmd $::targetid}
}
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command $command
}
But of course, in reality the addaction proc adds more actions than just a single one, and the code quickly becomes less readable (imo).

For cases such as yours, the easiest approach might be:
proc addaction {widgid {id $::targetid}} {
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command [list ::actioncmd [subst $id]]
}
That will be fine as long as those IDs are simple words (up to and including using spaces) but does require that you go in with the expectation that the value is being substituted (i.e., that $, [ and \ are special).
Alternatively, you could check how many arguments were passed and modify how the script is generated based on that:
# The value of the default doesn't actually matter
proc addaction {widgid {id $::targetid}} {
# How many argument words were passed? Includes the command name itself
if {[llength [info level 0]] == 2} {
# No extra argument; traditional code
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command {::actioncmd $::targetid}
} else {
# Extra argument: new style
$widgid add command -label "Action" -command [list ::actioncmd $id]]
}
}

Related

Unexpected switch command behavior in TCL

I am trying to run the below switch block using TCL. I am expecting the output to be 10 based on how the switch statement works. But the output comes out to be Default. I am not what's the explanation behind that and how I can fix it.
set a 10
set data 10
switch $data {
$a {
puts "10"
}
default {
puts "Default"
}
}
The output is:
Default
In tcl, the string enclosed in {} is literal. The variables in the string is not substituted. The same rule applies to the statements of the {} blocks passed to if/for/switch commands.
So in your case, $a is a literal string, not 10, for the switch command.
You may re-write your switch block as following thus $a is substituted to 10 before passed to switch command.
switch $data [list \
$a {
puts "10"
} \
default {
puts "Default"
} \
]

PowerShell, getting string syntax correct in 7-zip script

I can't seem to solve this, been struggling with it for a while (maybe it's simple; I just can't see it as I've been looking at it for so long).
I can get the 7z.exe syntax to work, but when I try and put it together into a simple script, it fails.
e.g., if I run .\zip.ps1 "C:\test\test.zip" "C:\test\test1.txt" "C:\test\test2.txt*
Instead of zipping up the 2 files required, it zips up everything in the C:\test folder, completely ignoring my arguments.
How can I adjust the below string syntax so that 7z.exe will correctly respect the input arguments and compress them from within a PowerShell script?
"Received $($args.Count) files:"
$parent = Split-Path (Split-Path $args[0]) -Leaf
$sevenzip = "C:\Program Files\7-Zip\7z.exe"
$zipname = "$($parent) $(Get-Date -Format 'yyyy_MM_dd HH_mm_ss').zip"
$args_line = $args | foreach-object { "`"$_`"" }
# $args_line = '"' + $($args -join """ """) + '"' # Want to use """ here so that it can capture not only files with spaces, but files with ' in the filename
''
"Zip Name : $zipname"
''
"Arguments : $args_line"
''
if (Test-Path $sevenzip) {
if (Test-Path "C:\0\$zipname") { rm "C:\0\$zipname" -Force }
''
'String output of the line to run:'
"& ""$sevenzip"" a -r -tzip ""C:\0\$zipname"" $args_line" # Taking this output and pasting onto console works.
''
& "$sevenzip" a -r -tzip "C:\0\$zipname" "$args_line" # This does not work
} else {
"7z.exe was not found at '$sevenzip', please check and try again"
}
The error that I get is:
Files read from disk: 0
Archive size: 22 bytes (1 KiB)
Scan WARNINGS for files and folders:
1 : The system cannot find the file specified.
----------------
Pass $args directly to your & "$sevenzip" call:
& "$sevenzip" a -r -tzip "C:\0\$zipname" $args
This makes PowerShell pass the array elements as individual arguments, automatically enclosing them in "..." if needed (based on whether they contain spaces).
Using arrays as arguments for external programs is in effect an implicit form of array-based splatting; thus, you could alternatively pass #args.
Generally, note that in direct invocation[1] you cannot pass multiple arguments to an external program via a single string; that is, something like "$args_line" cannot be expected to work, because it is passed as a single argument to the target program.
If you want to emulate the resulting part of the command line, for display purposes:
($argListForDisplay = $args.ForEach({ ($_, "`"$_`"")[$_ -match ' '] })) -join ' '
Note:
Each argument is conditionally enclosed in "..." - namely based on whether it contains at least one space - and the resulting tokens are joined to form a single, space-separated list (string).
The assumption is that no argument has embedded " chars.
A simplified example:
& { # an ad-hoc script block that functions like a script or function
# Construct the argument list *for display*
$argListForDisplay = $args.ForEach({ ($_, "`"$_`"")[$_ -match ' '] }) -join ' '
#"
The following is the equivalent of:
Write-Output $argListForDisplay
"#
# Pass $args *directly*
# Simply prints the argument received one by one, each on its own line.
# Note: With PowerShell-native commands, generally use #args instead (see below).
Write-Output $args
} firstArg 'another Arg' lastArg # sample pass-through arguments
Output:
The following is the equivalent of:
Write-Output firstArg "another Arg" lastArg
firstArg
another Arg
lastArg
Note: Write-Output is used in lieu of an external program for convenience. Technically, you'd have to use #args instead of $args in order to pass the array elements as individual, positional arguments, but, as stated, this is the default behavior with externals programs. Write-Output, as a PowerShell-native command, receives the array as a whole, as a single argument when $args is used; it just so happens to process that array the same way as if its elements had been passed as individual arguments.
[1] You can use a single string as an -ArgumentList value for Start-Process. However, Start-Process is usually the wrong tool for invoking console applications such as 7z.exe - see this answer.

To get the value of a variable from shellscript

I am creating some shell script.
script1 is having an if condition inside method1
for ex-
script1
method1()
{
if [[somecondition]]
then
var=y
else
var=n
fi
}
method2
....
....
I want to have the value of var in script2
script2
methodx()
{
foo=$var
if [[ $foo = [Yy] ]]
then
.....
.....
elif [[ $foo = [Nn] ]]
then
.....
.....
else
.....
fi
}
Both this script are being executed in another script
script3
methodA()
{
./script1
....
....
....
}
methodB()
{
./script2
....
....
....
}
How can I get the value of var from script1 to script2
Looks like you need method1 from script1 and methodx from script2 to be defined in script3's shell. To do that, in script3 you need to source script1 and source script2, not execute them. To accomplish that, you'll probably have to refactor your code a bit, as I see method1 defined in both script1 and script3.
You always need space inside [[ and ]]. Also, to test a pattern you can use [[ $foo =~ [Nn] ]].
In general if you want to store the text printed by a script to standard output you use varname=$(command arguments).
As l0b0 says, in methodA, instead of just ./script1, you do:
foo=$( ./script1 )
you might want to put quotes around it if script1's output has spaces:
foo="$( ./script1 )"
Also, just to be safe, declare foo outside of method1 so it is global (which is the default but its always nice to see things declared. So, at the top of script3 do:
typeset foo
If you can incorporate script1 and script2 into script3, that will be faster and probably easier to maintain but there is still many times that you need to use the $( ... ) construct. In the old days, this use to be back tics:
foo=` ./script1 `
That syntax is still supported.

How to return data from a bash shell script subroutine?

Given the following two executable scripts:
----- file1.sh
#!/bin/sh
. file2.sh
some_routine data
----- file2.sh
#!/bin/sh
some_routine()
{
#get the data passed in
localVar=$1
}
I can pass 'data' to a subroutine in another script, but I would also like to return data.
Is it possible to return information from some_routine?
e.g: var = some_routine data
Have the subroutine output something, and then use $() to capture the output:
some_routine() {
echo "foo $1"
}
some_var=$(some_routine bar)
It's not allowed, just set the value of a global variable (..all variables are global in bash)
if
some_routine() {
echo "first"
echo "foo $1"
}
some_var=$(some_routine "second")
echo "result: $some_var"
they are ok.But the result seems to be decided by the first "echo".Another way is use "eval".
some_var return "first"
some_routine()
{
echo "cmj"
eval $2=$1
}
some_routine "second" some_var
echo "result: $some_var"
in this way, some_var return "second".The bash don't return a string directly.So we need some tricks.

How to return a string value from a Bash function

I'd like to return a string from a Bash function.
I'll write the example in java to show what I'd like to do:
public String getSomeString() {
return "tadaa";
}
String variable = getSomeString();
The example below works in bash, but is there a better way to do this?
function getSomeString {
echo "tadaa"
}
VARIABLE=$(getSomeString)
There is no better way I know of. Bash knows only status codes (integers) and strings written to the stdout.
You could have the function take a variable as the first arg and modify the variable with the string you want to return.
#!/bin/bash
set -x
function pass_back_a_string() {
eval "$1='foo bar rab oof'"
}
return_var=''
pass_back_a_string return_var
echo $return_var
Prints "foo bar rab oof".
Edit: added quoting in the appropriate place to allow whitespace in string to address #Luca Borrione's comment.
Edit: As a demonstration, see the following program. This is a general-purpose solution: it even allows you to receive a string into a local variable.
#!/bin/bash
set -x
function pass_back_a_string() {
eval "$1='foo bar rab oof'"
}
return_var=''
pass_back_a_string return_var
echo $return_var
function call_a_string_func() {
local lvar=''
pass_back_a_string lvar
echo "lvar='$lvar' locally"
}
call_a_string_func
echo "lvar='$lvar' globally"
This prints:
+ return_var=
+ pass_back_a_string return_var
+ eval 'return_var='\''foo bar rab oof'\'''
++ return_var='foo bar rab oof'
+ echo foo bar rab oof
foo bar rab oof
+ call_a_string_func
+ local lvar=
+ pass_back_a_string lvar
+ eval 'lvar='\''foo bar rab oof'\'''
++ lvar='foo bar rab oof'
+ echo 'lvar='\''foo bar rab oof'\'' locally'
lvar='foo bar rab oof' locally
+ echo 'lvar='\'''\'' globally'
lvar='' globally
Edit: demonstrating that the original variable's value is available in the function, as was incorrectly criticized by #Xichen Li in a comment.
#!/bin/bash
set -x
function pass_back_a_string() {
eval "echo in pass_back_a_string, original $1 is \$$1"
eval "$1='foo bar rab oof'"
}
return_var='original return_var'
pass_back_a_string return_var
echo $return_var
function call_a_string_func() {
local lvar='original lvar'
pass_back_a_string lvar
echo "lvar='$lvar' locally"
}
call_a_string_func
echo "lvar='$lvar' globally"
This gives output:
+ return_var='original return_var'
+ pass_back_a_string return_var
+ eval 'echo in pass_back_a_string, original return_var is $return_var'
++ echo in pass_back_a_string, original return_var is original return_var
in pass_back_a_string, original return_var is original return_var
+ eval 'return_var='\''foo bar rab oof'\'''
++ return_var='foo bar rab oof'
+ echo foo bar rab oof
foo bar rab oof
+ call_a_string_func
+ local 'lvar=original lvar'
+ pass_back_a_string lvar
+ eval 'echo in pass_back_a_string, original lvar is $lvar'
++ echo in pass_back_a_string, original lvar is original lvar
in pass_back_a_string, original lvar is original lvar
+ eval 'lvar='\''foo bar rab oof'\'''
++ lvar='foo bar rab oof'
+ echo 'lvar='\''foo bar rab oof'\'' locally'
lvar='foo bar rab oof' locally
+ echo 'lvar='\'''\'' globally'
lvar='' globally
All answers above ignore what has been stated in the man page of bash.
All variables declared inside a function will be shared with the calling environment.
All variables declared local will not be shared.
Example code
#!/bin/bash
f()
{
echo function starts
local WillNotExists="It still does!"
DoesNotExists="It still does!"
echo function ends
}
echo $DoesNotExists #Should print empty line
echo $WillNotExists #Should print empty line
f #Call the function
echo $DoesNotExists #Should print It still does!
echo $WillNotExists #Should print empty line
And output
$ sh -x ./x.sh
+ echo
+ echo
+ f
+ echo function starts
function starts
+ local 'WillNotExists=It still does!'
+ DoesNotExists='It still does!'
+ echo function ends
function ends
+ echo It still 'does!'
It still does!
+ echo
Also under pdksh and ksh this script does the same!
Bash, since version 4.3, feb 2014(?), has explicit support for reference variables or name references (namerefs), beyond "eval", with the same beneficial performance and indirection effect, and which may be clearer in your scripts and also harder to "forget to 'eval' and have to fix this error":
declare [-aAfFgilnrtux] [-p] [name[=value] ...]
typeset [-aAfFgilnrtux] [-p] [name[=value] ...]
Declare variables and/or give them attributes
...
-n Give each name the nameref attribute, making it a name reference
to another variable. That other variable is defined by the value
of name. All references and assignments to name, except for⋅
changing the -n attribute itself, are performed on the variable
referenced by name's value. The -n attribute cannot be applied to
array variables.
...
When used in a function, declare and typeset make each name local,
as with the local command, unless the -g option is supplied...
and also:
PARAMETERS
A variable can be assigned the nameref attribute using the -n option to the
declare or local builtin commands (see the descriptions of declare and local
below) to create a nameref, or a reference to another variable. This allows
variables to be manipulated indirectly. Whenever the nameref variable is⋅
referenced or assigned to, the operation is actually performed on the variable
specified by the nameref variable's value. A nameref is commonly used within
shell functions to refer to a variable whose name is passed as an argument to⋅
the function. For instance, if a variable name is passed to a shell function
as its first argument, running
declare -n ref=$1
inside the function creates a nameref variable ref whose value is the variable
name passed as the first argument. References and assignments to ref are
treated as references and assignments to the variable whose name was passed as⋅
$1. If the control variable in a for loop has the nameref attribute, the list
of words can be a list of shell variables, and a name reference will be⋅
established for each word in the list, in turn, when the loop is executed.
Array variables cannot be given the -n attribute. However, nameref variables
can reference array variables and subscripted array variables. Namerefs can be⋅
unset using the -n option to the unset builtin. Otherwise, if unset is executed
with the name of a nameref variable as an argument, the variable referenced by⋅
the nameref variable will be unset.
For example (EDIT 2: (thank you Ron) namespaced (prefixed) the function-internal variable name, to minimize external variable clashes, which should finally answer properly, the issue raised in the comments by Karsten):
# $1 : string; your variable to contain the return value
function return_a_string () {
declare -n ret=$1
local MYLIB_return_a_string_message="The date is "
MYLIB_return_a_string_message+=$(date)
ret=$MYLIB_return_a_string_message
}
and testing this example:
$ return_a_string result; echo $result
The date is 20160817
Note that the bash "declare" builtin, when used in a function, makes the declared variable "local" by default, and "-n" can also be used with "local".
I prefer to distinguish "important declare" variables from "boring local" variables, so using "declare" and "local" in this way acts as documentation.
EDIT 1 - (Response to comment below by Karsten) - I cannot add comments below any more, but Karsten's comment got me thinking, so I did the following test which WORKS FINE, AFAICT - Karsten if you read this, please provide an exact set of test steps from the command line, showing the problem you assume exists, because these following steps work just fine:
$ return_a_string ret; echo $ret
The date is 20170104
(I ran this just now, after pasting the above function into a bash term - as you can see, the result works just fine.)
Like bstpierre above, I use and recommend the use of explicitly naming output variables:
function some_func() # OUTVAR ARG1
{
local _outvar=$1
local _result # Use some naming convention to avoid OUTVARs to clash
... some processing ....
eval $_outvar=\$_result # Instead of just =$_result
}
Note the use of quoting the $. This will avoid interpreting content in $result as shell special characters. I have found that this is an order of magnitude faster than the result=$(some_func "arg1") idiom of capturing an echo. The speed difference seems even more notable using bash on MSYS where stdout capturing from function calls is almost catastrophic.
It's ok to send in a local variables since locals are dynamically scoped in bash:
function another_func() # ARG
{
local result
some_func result "$1"
echo result is $result
}
You could also capture the function output:
#!/bin/bash
function getSomeString() {
echo "tadaa!"
}
return_var=$(getSomeString)
echo $return_var
# Alternative syntax:
return_var=`getSomeString`
echo $return_var
Looks weird, but is better than using global variables IMHO. Passing parameters works as usual, just put them inside the braces or backticks.
The most straightforward and robust solution is to use command substitution, as other people wrote:
assign()
{
local x
x="Test"
echo "$x"
}
x=$(assign) # This assigns string "Test" to x
The downside is performance as this requires a separate process.
The other technique suggested in this topic, namely passing the name of a variable to assign to as an argument, has side effects, and I wouldn't recommend it in its basic form. The problem is that you will probably need some variables in the function to calculate the return value, and it may happen that the name of the variable intended to store the return value will interfere with one of them:
assign()
{
local x
x="Test"
eval "$1=\$x"
}
assign y # This assigns string "Test" to y, as expected
assign x # This will NOT assign anything to x in this scope
# because the name "x" is declared as local inside the function
You might, of course, not declare internal variables of the function as local, but you really should always do it as otherwise you may, on the other hand, accidentally overwrite an unrelated variable from the parent scope if there is one with the same name.
One possible workaround is an explicit declaration of the passed variable as global:
assign()
{
local x
eval declare -g $1
x="Test"
eval "$1=\$x"
}
If name "x" is passed as an argument, the second row of the function body will overwrite the previous local declaration. But the names themselves might still interfere, so if you intend to use the value previously stored in the passed variable prior to write the return value there, be aware that you must copy it into another local variable at the very beginning; otherwise the result will be unpredictable!
Besides, this will only work in the most recent version of BASH, namely 4.2. More portable code might utilize explicit conditional constructs with the same effect:
assign()
{
if [[ $1 != x ]]; then
local x
fi
x="Test"
eval "$1=\$x"
}
Perhaps the most elegant solution is just to reserve one global name for function return values and
use it consistently in every function you write.
As previously mentioned, the "correct" way to return a string from a function is with command substitution. In the event that the function also needs to output to console (as #Mani mentions above), create a temporary fd in the beginning of the function and redirect to console. Close the temporary fd before returning your string.
#!/bin/bash
# file: func_return_test.sh
returnString() {
exec 3>&1 >/dev/tty
local s=$1
s=${s:="some default string"}
echo "writing directly to console"
exec 3>&-
echo "$s"
}
my_string=$(returnString "$*")
echo "my_string: [$my_string]"
executing script with no params produces...
# ./func_return_test.sh
writing directly to console
my_string: [some default string]
hope this helps people
-Andy
You could use a global variable:
declare globalvar='some string'
string ()
{
eval "$1='some other string'"
} # ---------- end of function string ----------
string globalvar
echo "'${globalvar}'"
This gives
'some other string'
To illustrate my comment on Andy's answer, with additional file descriptor manipulation to avoid use of /dev/tty:
#!/bin/bash
exec 3>&1
returnString() {
exec 4>&1 >&3
local s=$1
s=${s:="some default string"}
echo "writing to stdout"
echo "writing to stderr" >&2
exec >&4-
echo "$s"
}
my_string=$(returnString "$*")
echo "my_string: [$my_string]"
Still nasty, though.
The way you have it is the only way to do this without breaking scope. Bash doesn't have a concept of return types, just exit codes and file descriptors (stdin/out/err, etc)
Addressing Vicky Ronnen's head up, considering the following code:
function use_global
{
eval "$1='changed using a global var'"
}
function capture_output
{
echo "always changed"
}
function test_inside_a_func
{
local _myvar='local starting value'
echo "3. $_myvar"
use_global '_myvar'
echo "4. $_myvar"
_myvar=$( capture_output )
echo "5. $_myvar"
}
function only_difference
{
local _myvar='local starting value'
echo "7. $_myvar"
local use_global '_myvar'
echo "8. $_myvar"
local _myvar=$( capture_output )
echo "9. $_myvar"
}
declare myvar='global starting value'
echo "0. $myvar"
use_global 'myvar'
echo "1. $myvar"
myvar=$( capture_output )
echo "2. $myvar"
test_inside_a_func
echo "6. $_myvar" # this was local inside the above function
only_difference
will give
0. global starting value
1. changed using a global var
2. always changed
3. local starting value
4. changed using a global var
5. always changed
6.
7. local starting value
8. local starting value
9. always changed
Maybe the normal scenario is to use the syntax used in the test_inside_a_func function, thus you can use both methods in the majority of cases, although capturing the output is the safer method always working in any situation, mimicking the returning value from a function that you can find in other languages, as Vicky Ronnen correctly pointed out.
The options have been all enumerated, I think. Choosing one may come down to a matter of the best style for your particular application, and in that vein, I want to offer one particular style I've found useful. In bash, variables and functions are not in the same namespace. So, treating the variable of the same name as the value of the function is a convention that I find minimizes name clashes and enhances readability, if I apply it rigorously. An example from real life:
UnGetChar=
function GetChar() {
# assume failure
GetChar=
# if someone previously "ungot" a char
if ! [ -z "$UnGetChar" ]; then
GetChar="$UnGetChar"
UnGetChar=
return 0 # success
# else, if not at EOF
elif IFS= read -N1 GetChar ; then
return 0 # success
else
return 1 # EOF
fi
}
function UnGetChar(){
UnGetChar="$1"
}
And, an example of using such functions:
function GetToken() {
# assume failure
GetToken=
# if at end of file
if ! GetChar; then
return 1 # EOF
# if start of comment
elif [[ "$GetChar" == "#" ]]; then
while [[ "$GetChar" != $'\n' ]]; do
GetToken+="$GetChar"
GetChar
done
UnGetChar "$GetChar"
# if start of quoted string
elif [ "$GetChar" == '"' ]; then
# ... et cetera
As you can see, the return status is there for you to use when you need it, or ignore if you don't. The "returned" variable can likewise be used or ignored, but of course only after the function is invoked.
Of course, this is only a convention. You are free to fail to set the associated value before returning (hence my convention of always nulling it at the start of the function) or to trample its value by calling the function again (possibly indirectly). Still, it's a convention I find very useful if I find myself making heavy use of bash functions.
As opposed to the sentiment that this is a sign one should e.g. "move to perl", my philosophy is that conventions are always important for managing the complexity of any language whatsoever.
In my programs, by convention, this is what the pre-existing $REPLY variable is for, which read uses for that exact purpose.
function getSomeString {
REPLY="tadaa"
}
getSomeString
echo $REPLY
This echoes
tadaa
But to avoid conflicts, any other global variable will do.
declare result
function getSomeString {
result="tadaa"
}
getSomeString
echo $result
If that isn’t enough, I recommend Markarian451’s solution.
They key problem of any 'named output variable' scheme where the caller can pass in the variable name (whether using eval or declare -n) is inadvertent aliasing, i.e. name clashes: From an encapsulation point of view, it's awful to not be able to add or rename a local variable in a function without checking ALL the function's callers first to make sure they're not wanting to pass that same name as the output parameter. (Or in the other direction, I don't want to have to read the source of the function I'm calling just to make sure the output parameter I intend to use is not a local in that function.)
The only way around that is to use a single dedicated output variable like REPLY (as suggested by Evi1M4chine) or a convention like the one suggested by Ron Burk.
However, it's possible to have functions use a fixed output variable internally, and then add some sugar over the top to hide this fact from the caller, as I've done with the call function in the following example. Consider this a proof of concept, but the key points are
The function always assigns the return value to REPLY, and can also return an exit code as usual
From the perspective of the caller, the return value can be assigned to any variable (local or global) including REPLY (see the wrapper example). The exit code of the function is passed through, so using them in e.g. an if or while or similar constructs works as expected.
Syntactically the function call is still a single simple statement.
The reason this works is because the call function itself has no locals and uses no variables other than REPLY, avoiding any potential for name clashes. At the point where the caller-defined output variable name is assigned, we're effectively in the caller's scope (technically in the identical scope of the call function), rather than in the scope of the function being called.
#!/bin/bash
function call() { # var=func [args ...]
REPLY=; "${1#*=}" "${#:2}"; eval "${1%%=*}=\$REPLY; return $?"
}
function greet() {
case "$1" in
us) REPLY="hello";;
nz) REPLY="kia ora";;
*) return 123;;
esac
}
function wrapper() {
call REPLY=greet "$#"
}
function main() {
local a b c d
call a=greet us
echo "a='$a' ($?)"
call b=greet nz
echo "b='$b' ($?)"
call c=greet de
echo "c='$c' ($?)"
call d=wrapper us
echo "d='$d' ($?)"
}
main
Output:
a='hello' (0)
b='kia ora' (0)
c='' (123)
d='hello' (0)
You can echo a string, but catch it by piping (|) the function to something else.
You can do it with expr, though ShellCheck reports this usage as deprecated.
bash pattern to return both scalar and array value objects:
definition
url_parse() { # parse 'url' into: 'url_host', 'url_port', ...
local "$#" # inject caller 'url' argument in local scope
local url_host="..." url_path="..." # calculate 'url_*' components
declare -p ${!url_*} # return only 'url_*' object fields to the caller
}
invocation
main() { # invoke url parser and inject 'url_*' results in local scope
eval "$(url_parse url=http://host/path)" # parse 'url'
echo "host=$url_host path=$url_path" # use 'url_*' components
}
Although there were a lot of good answers, they all did not work the way I wanted them to. So here is my solution with these key points:
Helping the forgetful programmer
Atleast I would struggle to always remember error checking after something like this: var=$(myFunction)
Allows assigning values with newline chars \n
Some solutions do not allow for that as some forgot about the single quotes around the value to assign. Right way: eval "${returnVariable}='${value}'" or even better: see the next point below.
Using printf instead of eval
Just try using something like this myFunction "date && var2" to some of the supposed solutions here. eval will execute whatever is given to it. I only want to assign values so I use printf -v "${returnVariable}" "%s" "${value}" instead.
Encapsulation and protection against variable name collision
If a different user or at least someone with less knowledge about the function (this is likely me in some months time) is using myFunction I do not want them to know that he must use a global return value name or some variable names are forbidden to use. That is why I added a name check at the top of myFunction:
if [[ "${1}" = "returnVariable" ]]; then
echo "Cannot give the ouput to \"returnVariable\" as a variable with the same name is used in myFunction()!"
echo "If that is still what you want to do please do that outside of myFunction()!"
return 1
fi
Note this could also be put into a function itself if you have to check a lot of variables.
If I still want to use the same name (here: returnVariable) I just create a buffer variable, give that to myFunction and then copy the value returnVariable.
So here it is:
myFunction():
myFunction() {
if [[ "${1}" = "returnVariable" ]]; then
echo "Cannot give the ouput to \"returnVariable\" as a variable with the same name is used in myFunction()!"
echo "If that is still what you want to do please do that outside of myFunction()!"
return 1
fi
if [[ "${1}" = "value" ]]; then
echo "Cannot give the ouput to \"value\" as a variable with the same name is used in myFunction()!"
echo "If that is still what you want to do please do that outside of myFunction()!"
return 1
fi
local returnVariable="${1}"
local value=$'===========\nHello World\n==========='
echo "setting the returnVariable now..."
printf -v "${returnVariable}" "%s" "${value}"
}
Test cases:
var1="I'm not greeting!"
myFunction var1
[[ $? -eq 0 ]] && echo "myFunction(): SUCCESS" || echo "myFunction(): FAILURE"
printf "var1:\n%s\n" "${var1}"
# Output:
# setting the returnVariable now...
# myFunction(): SUCCESS
# var1:
# ===========
# Hello World
# ===========
returnVariable="I'm not greeting!"
myFunction returnVariable
[[ $? -eq 0 ]] && echo "myFunction(): SUCCESS" || echo "myFunction(): FAILURE"
printf "returnVariable:\n%s\n" "${returnVariable}"
# Output
# Cannot give the ouput to "returnVariable" as a variable with the same name is used in myFunction()!
# If that is still what you want to do please do that outside of myFunction()!
# myFunction(): FAILURE
# returnVariable:
# I'm not greeting!
var2="I'm not greeting!"
myFunction "date && var2"
[[ $? -eq 0 ]] && echo "myFunction(): SUCCESS" || echo "myFunction(): FAILURE"
printf "var2:\n%s\n" "${var2}"
# Output
# setting the returnVariable now...
# ...myFunction: line ..: printf: `date && var2': not a valid identifier
# myFunction(): FAILURE
# var2:
# I'm not greeting!
myFunction var3
[[ $? -eq 0 ]] && echo "myFunction(): SUCCESS" || echo "myFunction(): FAILURE"
printf "var3:\n%s\n" "${var3}"
# Output
# setting the returnVariable now...
# myFunction(): SUCCESS
# var3:
# ===========
# Hello World
# ===========
#Implement a generic return stack for functions:
STACK=()
push() {
STACK+=( "${1}" )
}
pop() {
export $1="${STACK[${#STACK[#]}-1]}"
unset 'STACK[${#STACK[#]}-1]';
}
#Usage:
my_func() {
push "Hello world!"
push "Hello world2!"
}
my_func ; pop MESSAGE2 ; pop MESSAGE1
echo ${MESSAGE1} ${MESSAGE2}
agt#agtsoft:~/temp$ cat ./fc
#!/bin/sh
fcall='function fcall { local res p=$1; shift; fname $*; eval "$p=$res"; }; fcall'
function f1 {
res=$[($1+$2)*2];
}
function f2 {
local a;
eval ${fcall//fname/f1} a 2 3;
echo f2:$a;
}
a=3;
f2;
echo after:a=$a, res=$res
agt#agtsoft:~/temp$ ./fc
f2:10
after:a=3, res=

Resources