Why are "Here Strings" called "Here Strings"? - string

What is the reasoning behind the name?
SS64 explains here strings in PowerShell as follows:
A here string is a single-quoted or double-quoted string which can span multiple lines.
Expressions in single-quoted strings are not evaluated.
All the lines in a here-string are interpreted as strings, even though they are not enclosed in quotation marks.
$myHereString = #'
some text with "quotes" and variable names $printthis
some more text
'#

They have this name in PowerShell because it is borrowed from Unix style shells, like many other elements and concepts in PowerShell:
From Wikipedia:
Here documents originate in the Unix shell, and are found in sh, csh, ksh, bash and zsh, among others.
As for why that name was used originally, the article does not strictly cover etymology, but based on this description:
In computing, a here document (here-document, here-text, heredoc, hereis, here-string or here-script) is a file literal or input stream literal: it is a section of a source code file that is treated as if it were a separate file. The term is also used for a form of multiline string literals that use similar syntax, preserving line breaks and other whitespace (including indentation) in the text.
It seems logical that the "here" part of the name refers to a file being included "here" (as in, at this point).
Just for completeness, it is worth noting that PowerShell also supports newlines directly in both single and double quoted [string]s, like so:
$myString = 'some text with "quotes" and variable names $printthis
some more text'
A better example of where a here-string is useful is when you need both types of quotes:
$myHereString = #'
some text with "quotes" and variable names $printthis
some more text
and my grandma's soup
'#
If that were just a single quoted string, the ' in grandma's would need to be escaped.
If it were a double quoted string, you'd need to escape the instances of " and you'd need to escape the $ if you didn't want variable expansion.
Interesting aside: the differences between how here-strings are interpreted form the basis of this demonstration of writing a bash/powershell/win batch polyglot (a script whose contents can be executed in any of those environments).

Related

Writing a BASH command to print a range [duplicate]

I want to run a command from a bash script which has single quotes and some other commands inside the single quotes and a variable.
e.g. repo forall -c '....$variable'
In this format, $ is escaped and the variable is not expanded.
I tried the following variations but they were rejected:
repo forall -c '...."$variable" '
repo forall -c " '....$variable' "
" repo forall -c '....$variable' "
repo forall -c "'" ....$variable "'"
If I substitute the value in place of the variable the command is executed just fine.
Please tell me where am I going wrong.
Inside single quotes everything is preserved literally, without exception.
That means you have to close the quotes, insert something, and then re-enter again.
'before'"$variable"'after'
'before'"'"'after'
'before'\''after'
Word concatenation is simply done by juxtaposition. As you can verify, each of the above lines is a single word to the shell. Quotes (single or double quotes, depending on the situation) don't isolate words. They are only used to disable interpretation of various special characters, like whitespace, $, ;... For a good tutorial on quoting see Mark Reed's answer. Also relevant: Which characters need to be escaped in bash?
Do not concatenate strings interpreted by a shell
You should absolutely avoid building shell commands by concatenating variables. This is a bad idea similar to concatenation of SQL fragments (SQL injection!).
Usually it is possible to have placeholders in the command, and to supply the command together with variables so that the callee can receive them from the invocation arguments list.
For example, the following is very unsafe. DON'T DO THIS
script="echo \"Argument 1 is: $myvar\""
/bin/sh -c "$script"
If the contents of $myvar is untrusted, here is an exploit:
myvar='foo"; echo "you were hacked'
Instead of the above invocation, use positional arguments. The following invocation is better -- it's not exploitable:
script='echo "arg 1 is: $1"'
/bin/sh -c "$script" -- "$myvar"
Note the use of single ticks in the assignment to script, which means that it's taken literally, without variable expansion or any other form of interpretation.
The repo command can't care what kind of quotes it gets. If you need parameter expansion, use double quotes. If that means you wind up having to backslash a lot of stuff, use single quotes for most of it, and then break out of them and go into doubles for the part where you need the expansion to happen.
repo forall -c 'literal stuff goes here; '"stuff with $parameters here"' more literal stuff'
Explanation follows, if you're interested.
When you run a command from the shell, what that command receives as arguments is an array of null-terminated strings. Those strings may contain absolutely any non-null character.
But when the shell is building that array of strings from a command line, it interprets some characters specially; this is designed to make commands easier (indeed, possible) to type. For instance, spaces normally indicate the boundary between strings in the array; for that reason, the individual arguments are sometimes called "words". But an argument may nonetheless have spaces in it; you just need some way to tell the shell that's what you want.
You can use a backslash in front of any character (including space, or another backslash) to tell the shell to treat that character literally. But while you can do something like this:
reply=\”That\'ll\ be\ \$4.96,\ please,\"\ said\ the\ cashier
...it can get tiresome. So the shell offers an alternative: quotation marks. These come in two main varieties.
Double-quotation marks are called "grouping quotes". They prevent wildcards and aliases from being expanded, but mostly they're for including spaces in a word. Other things like parameter and command expansion (the sorts of thing signaled by a $) still happen. And of course if you want a literal double-quote inside double-quotes, you have to backslash it:
reply="\"That'll be \$4.96, please,\" said the cashier"
Single-quotation marks are more draconian. Everything between them is taken completely literally, including backslashes. There is absolutely no way to get a literal single quote inside single quotes.
Fortunately, quotation marks in the shell are not word delimiters; by themselves, they don't terminate a word. You can go in and out of quotes, including between different types of quotes, within the same word to get the desired result:
reply='"That'\''ll be $4.96, please," said the cashier'
So that's easier - a lot fewer backslashes, although the close-single-quote, backslashed-literal-single-quote, open-single-quote sequence takes some getting used to.
Modern shells have added another quoting style not specified by the POSIX standard, in which the leading single quotation mark is prefixed with a dollar sign. Strings so quoted follow similar conventions to string literals in the ANSI standard version of the C programming language, and are therefore sometimes called "ANSI strings" and the $'...' pair "ANSI quotes". Within such strings, the above advice about backslashes being taken literally no longer applies. Instead, they become special again - not only can you include a literal single quotation mark or backslash by prepending a backslash to it, but the shell also expands the ANSI C character escapes (like \n for a newline, \t for tab, and \xHH for the character with hexadecimal code HH). Otherwise, however, they behave as single-quoted strings: no parameter or command substitution takes place:
reply=$'"That\'ll be $4.96, please," said the cashier'
The important thing to note is that the single string that gets stored in the reply variable is exactly the same in all of these examples. Similarly, after the shell is done parsing a command line, there is no way for the command being run to tell exactly how each argument string was actually typed – or even if it was typed, rather than being created programmatically somehow.
Below is what worked for me -
QUOTE="'"
hive -e "alter table TBL_NAME set location $QUOTE$TBL_HDFS_DIR_PATH$QUOTE"
EDIT: (As per the comments in question:)
I've been looking into this since then. I was lucky enough that I had repo laying around. Still it's not clear to me whether you need to enclose your commands between single quotes by force. I looked into the repo syntax and I don't think you need to. You could used double quotes around your command, and then use whatever single and double quotes you need inside provided you escape double ones.
just use printf
instead of
repo forall -c '....$variable'
use printf to replace the variable token with the expanded variable.
For example:
template='.... %s'
repo forall -c $(printf "${template}" "${variable}")
Variables can contain single quotes.
myvar=\'....$variable\'
repo forall -c $myvar
I was wondering why I could never get my awk statement to print from an ssh session so I found this forum. Nothing here helped me directly but if anyone is having an issue similar to below, then give me an up vote. It seems any sort of single or double quotes were just not helping, but then I didn't try everything.
check_var="df -h / | awk 'FNR==2{print $3}'"
getckvar=$(ssh user#host "$check_var")
echo $getckvar
What do you get? A load of nothing.
Fix: escape \$3 in your print function.
Does this work for you?
eval repo forall -c '....$variable'

concatenating variables inside linux commands in perl

I need to use a system command (grep) which has a variable concatenated with a string as the regex to search a file.
Is it possible to concatenate a regex for grep between a variable and string in Perl??
I have tried using the . operator but it doesn't work.
if(`grep -e "$fubname._early_exit_indicator = 1" $golden_path/early_exit_information.tsv`){
print "-D- The golden data indicates early exit should occur\n";
$golden_early_exit_indicator=1;
}
Expected to match the regex, "$fubname._early_exit_indicator = 1" but it doesn't match as required.
The expected result should be:
-D- The golden data indicates early exit should occur
But in the present code, it doesn't print this.
Output link: (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1N0SaZ-r3bYPlljKUgTOH5AbxCAaHw7zD)
The problem is that the . operator is not recognized as an operator inside quotes. Dot operators are use between strings, not inside strings. Using the dot inside a string, inserts it literally. This literal dot in the pattern, causes the grep command in your code to fail.
Also note that inside quotes, Perl tries to interpolates variable using certain identifier parsing rules.
See perldoc perlop for the different types of quoting that are used in Perl, and see perldoc perldata for information about the identifier parsing rules.
In summary, in order to interpolate the variable $fubname in the backticks argument, use
"${fubname}_early_exit_indicator = 1"
Note that we need braces around the identifier, since the following underscore is a valid identifier character. (To the contrary a literal dot is not a valid identifier character, so if following character was a literal dot, you would not need the braces around the identifier.)
The . operator will not work inside the quotes. use something like this-
if(`grep -e "${fubname}_early_exit_indicator = 1" ...
I hope this works

Why m4 uses two different characters for quotes?

In virtually every language quoting strings is straightforward - you put some stuff before a string and then the same stuff at the end of a string (maybe mirrored), for example:
"string"
'string'
R"(string)"
m4 macro processor is different though, because strings are quoted using backtick and single quote like this:
`string'
My question is: does this approach have any technical justification or is it just an expression of authors creativity?
Quoting Wikipedia, it is related to controlling macro expansion in strings:
Unlike most languages, strings in m4 are quoted using the backtick (`)
as the starting delimiter, and apostrophe (') as the ending delimiter.
The use of separate starting and ending delimiters allows for the
arbitrary nesting of quotation marks in strings, allowing a fine
degree of control of how and when macro expansion takes place in
different parts of a string.

How can I remove a newline (\n) at the end of a string?

The problem
I have multiple property lines in a single string separated by \n like this:
LINES2="Abc1.def=$SOME_VAR\nAbc2.def=SOMETHING_ELSE\n"$LINES
The LINES variable
might contain an undefined set of characters
may be empty. If it is empty, I want to avoid the trailing \n.
I am open for any command line utility (sed, tr, awk, ... you name it).
Tryings
I tried this to no avail
sed -z 's/\\n$//g' <<< $LINES2
I also had no luck with tr, since it does not accept regex.
Idea
There might be an approach to convert the \n to something else. But since $LINES can contain arbitrary characters, this might be dangerous.
Sources
I skim read through the following questions
How can I replace a newline (\n) using sed?
sed with literal string--not input file
Here's one solution:
LINES2="Abc1.def=$SOME_VAR"$'\n'"Abc2.def=SOMETHING_ELSE${LINES:+$'\n'$LINES}"
The syntax ${name:+value} means "insert value if the variable name exists and is not empty." So in this case, it inserts a newline followed by $LINES if $LINES is not empty, which seems to be precisely what you want.
I use $'\n' because "\n" is not a newline character. A more readable solution would be to define a shell variable whose value is a single newline.
It is not necessary to quote strings in shell assignment statements, since the right-hand side of an assignment does not undergo word-splitting nor glob expansion. Not quoting would make it easier to interpolate a $'\n'.
It is not usually advisable to use UPPER-CASE for shell variables because the shell and the OS use upper-case names for their own purposes. Your local variables should normally be lower case names.
So if I were not basing the answer on the command in the question, I would have written:
lines2=Abc1.def=$someVar$'\n'Abc2.def=SOMETHING_ELSE${lines:+$'\n'$lines}

bash difference between raw string and string in variable

I wrote a little script in bash, but it only worked when I stored the string as a variable, and I'd like to know why. Here's the summary:
When I use the string itself, bash treats it as a single entity
for word in "this is a sentence"; do
echo $word
done
# => this is a sentence
If I save the exact same string into a variable, bash iterates over the words
sentence="this is a sentence"
for word in $sentence; do
echo $word
done
# => this
# is
# a
# sentence
Why are these being treated differently?
Is there a simple way to iterate through the words in the string without first saving the string as a variable?
The quotes tell bash to treat a thing in quotes as a single parameter in a parameter list at the time the expression is evaluated. The quotes (unless protected with \ or ') are removed.
echo "" # prints newlines, no quotes
echo '""' # Print ""
export X='""'
env | grep X # X contains ""
export X=""
env | grep X # X is empty
When you use a variable, bash unpacks it as is (i.e. as if you typed the variable's contents in the variable's place). For a for-loop bash determines the list-elements to iterate over by separating the for-loop's parameters by whitespace, but treating (as always) quote-protected items a single parameter/list-element. Your variable contained no quotes -- items are treated as separate parameters.
As comments suggested, quotes are important. A for loop will step through a list of values terminated by a semicolon, and that list is a set of strings. Unquoted strings are delimited usually by whitespace. Whitespace inside a quoted string does not separate the string from its brethren, it's simply part of the quoted string. There's some truly excellent documentation about quotes in bash at http://mywiki.wooledge.org/Quotes . Read it. Read it now. You'll find a part that says
The quotes are not actually passed along to the command. They are removed by the shell (this process is cleverly called "quote removal").
To step through the words in a sentence that's stored in a variable (if I've inferred your question correctly), you could perhaps use an array to separate the words by whitespace:
#!/bin/bash
sentence="this is a sentence"
IFS=" " read -a words <<< "$sentence"
for word in "${words[#]}"; do
echo "$word"
done
In bash, read -a will divide a string by $IFS and place the divided parts into elements of the array. See http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashGuide/Arrays for more information about how bash arrays work.
If you want more details in pursuit of a specific problem, you might want to tell us what the problem is, or risk making this an XY problem.
In the assignment
sentence="this is a sentence"
there are no unquoted spaces, so everything to the right of the = is treated as a single word. (Something like sentence=this is a sentence would be parsed as a single assignment sentence=this followed by an attempt to run a program called is.) As a result, the value of sentences is a sequence of 18 characters. It is identical to
sentence=this\ is\ a\ sentence
because again, there are no unquoted spaces.
For the same reason
for word in "this is a sentence"; do
echo $word
done
has word being set to each word in the following sequence, which only contains a single word because there are no unquoted spaces.
The key difference with your other loop is that parameter expansions are subject to word-splitting after the fact. The loop
for word in $sentence; do
echo $word
done
after parameter expansion looks like
for word in this is a sentence; do
echo $word
done
so now word is set to each of the 4 words in the list following the in keyword.
It's not clear what you are actually asking at the end of your question, but the preceding is legal code. There is no requirement that a string be placed in quotes in bash; quotes do not define something as a string value, but simply escape every character that appears within the quotes. "foo" and \f\o\o are the same thing in shell.
Quoting turns any string into a single unit. If you lose the quotes, everything should be fine.

Resources