Assign variable using multiple lines

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

I have a function

f()
 echo 777

and a variable to which I assign the "return value" of the function.

x=$(f)

Very concise! However, in my real code, the variable and function names are quite a bit longer and the function also eats positional arguments, so that concise line above, gets very long. Since I like to keep things tidy, I would like to break the code above in two lines.

x=
$(f)

Still works! But: keeping things tidy also means respecting the indentation, so that gives something like

if foo
 x=
 $(f)
fi

which does not work anymore due to whitespaces! Is there a good workaround for this?

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

I have a function

f()
 echo 777

and a variable to which I assign the "return value" of the function.

x=$(f)

x=
$(f)

Still works! But: keeping things tidy also means respecting the indentation, so that gives something like

if foo
 x=
 $(f)
fi

which does not work anymore due to whitespaces! Is there a good workaround for this?

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
2
down vote

favorite

I have a function

f()
 echo 777

and a variable to which I assign the "return value" of the function.

x=$(f)

x=
$(f)

Still works! But: keeping things tidy also means respecting the indentation, so that gives something like

if foo
 x=
 $(f)
fi

which does not work anymore due to whitespaces! Is there a good workaround for this?

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

I have a function

f()
 echo 777

and a variable to which I assign the "return value" of the function.

x=$(f)

x=
$(f)

Still works! But: keeping things tidy also means respecting the indentation, so that gives something like

if foo
 x=
 $(f)
fi

which does not work anymore due to whitespaces! Is there a good workaround for this?

bash newlines assignment

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

asked 4 hours ago

pfnuesel

2,63941838

add a commentÂ |Â

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

up vote
0
down vote

accepted

You can wrap it in quotes:

if foo; then
 x="
 $(f)"
fi

Note that the indent will show/mess things up if you basically do anything other than use it plainly unquoted, though. Alternatively, you can use a subshell, which will eat the indent, instead:

if foo; then
 x=$(
 )$(f)
fi

Another solution:

if foo; then
 set -- $(f)
 x=$*
fi

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

If you are allowed to use here-docs, the following style works good. Quoting the here-doc string with a leading - allows your code to be intended with tabs only.

Something like

if true; then
 read -d '' -r x <<-EOF
 $(f)
 EOF
fi

But remember copy pasting the code from above doesn't work as Stack Exchange replaces tabs with spaces. You need to carefully type in the Tab character for the lines starting with the here-doc and the lines ending the here-doc. My vim configuration has mapped the tab character to 8 spaces. If you want to make it even neater, modify the spacing rule in vim by setting the spacing for tab to 4 spaces as :set tabstop=4

You can see how the Tab is formatted in my script, by looking into it using sed

$ sed -n l script.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash$
$
$
f()$
 echo 777$
$
$
if true; then$
tread -d '' -r x <<-PERSON$
t$(f)$
tPERSON$
fi$
$
echo $x$

Notice the t characters in the here-doc string above. If your script looks any different than the above, you would see the whining unexpected EOF errors.

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

1

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

Why split the line at the equals sign? You can just set the arguments to the function in a separate variable:

unset args
args+='arg1 '
args+='arg2 '
args+='arg3 '
x=$(f $args)

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

add a commentÂ |Â

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "",
contentPolicyHtml: "",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);

);

draft saved

draft discarded

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478804%2fassign-variable-using-multiple-lines%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

up vote
0
down vote

accepted

You can wrap it in quotes:

if foo; then
 x="
 $(f)"
fi

Note that the indent will show/mess things up if you basically do anything other than use it plainly unquoted, though. Alternatively, you can use a subshell, which will eat the indent, instead:

if foo; then
 x=$(
 )$(f)
fi

Another solution:

if foo; then
 set -- $(f)
 x=$*
fi

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
0
down vote

accepted

You can wrap it in quotes:

if foo; then
 x="
 $(f)"
fi

Note that the indent will show/mess things up if you basically do anything other than use it plainly unquoted, though. Alternatively, you can use a subshell, which will eat the indent, instead:

if foo; then
 x=$(
 )$(f)
fi

Another solution:

if foo; then
 set -- $(f)
 x=$*
fi

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
0
down vote

accepted

You can wrap it in quotes:

if foo; then
 x="
 $(f)"
fi

Note that the indent will show/mess things up if you basically do anything other than use it plainly unquoted, though. Alternatively, you can use a subshell, which will eat the indent, instead:

if foo; then
 x=$(
 )$(f)
fi

Another solution:

if foo; then
 set -- $(f)
 x=$*
fi

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

You can wrap it in quotes:

if foo; then
 x="
 $(f)"
fi

Note that the indent will show/mess things up if you basically do anything other than use it plainly unquoted, though. Alternatively, you can use a subshell, which will eat the indent, instead:

if foo; then
 x=$(
 )$(f)
fi

Another solution:

if foo; then
 set -- $(f)
 x=$*
fi

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

edited 1 hour ago

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

answered 2 hours ago

Crestwave

262

New contributor

Crestwave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

add a commentÂ |Â

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

The second and third solutions are nice! The first one not so much. I assume this is why you got a downvote, which is completely unnecessary. Thanks for your help!
â€“Â pfnuesel
10 mins ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

If you are allowed to use here-docs, the following style works good. Quoting the here-doc string with a leading - allows your code to be intended with tabs only.

Something like

if true; then
 read -d '' -r x <<-EOF
 $(f)
 EOF
fi

You can see how the Tab is formatted in my script, by looking into it using sed

$ sed -n l script.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash$
$
$
f()$
 echo 777$
$
$
if true; then$
tread -d '' -r x <<-PERSON$
t$(f)$
tPERSON$
fi$
$
echo $x$

Notice the t characters in the here-doc string above. If your script looks any different than the above, you would see the whining unexpected EOF errors.

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

1

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

If you are allowed to use here-docs, the following style works good. Quoting the here-doc string with a leading - allows your code to be intended with tabs only.

Something like

if true; then
 read -d '' -r x <<-EOF
 $(f)
 EOF
fi

You can see how the Tab is formatted in my script, by looking into it using sed

$ sed -n l script.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash$
$
$
f()$
 echo 777$
$
$
if true; then$
tread -d '' -r x <<-PERSON$
t$(f)$
tPERSON$
fi$
$
echo $x$

Notice the t characters in the here-doc string above. If your script looks any different than the above, you would see the whining unexpected EOF errors.

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

1

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

If you are allowed to use here-docs, the following style works good. Quoting the here-doc string with a leading - allows your code to be intended with tabs only.

Something like

if true; then
 read -d '' -r x <<-EOF
 $(f)
 EOF
fi

You can see how the Tab is formatted in my script, by looking into it using sed

$ sed -n l script.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash$
$
$
f()$
 echo 777$
$
$
if true; then$
tread -d '' -r x <<-PERSON$
t$(f)$
tPERSON$
fi$
$
echo $x$

Notice the t characters in the here-doc string above. If your script looks any different than the above, you would see the whining unexpected EOF errors.

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

If you are allowed to use here-docs, the following style works good. Quoting the here-doc string with a leading - allows your code to be intended with tabs only.

Something like

if true; then
 read -d '' -r x <<-EOF
 $(f)
 EOF
fi

You can see how the Tab is formatted in my script, by looking into it using sed

$ sed -n l script.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash$
$
$
f()$
 echo 777$
$
$
if true; then$
tread -d '' -r x <<-PERSON$
t$(f)$
tPERSON$
fi$
$
echo $x$

Notice the t characters in the here-doc string above. If your script looks any different than the above, you would see the whining unexpected EOF errors.

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

edited 2 hours ago

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

answered 3 hours ago

Inian

3,053822

1

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

add a commentÂ |Â

1

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

Very nice! Had to read it like three times, to see where x is assigned.
â€“Â pfnuesel
1 hour ago

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

Why split the line at the equals sign? You can just set the arguments to the function in a separate variable:

unset args
args+='arg1 '
args+='arg2 '
args+='arg3 '
x=$(f $args)

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

Why split the line at the equals sign? You can just set the arguments to the function in a separate variable:

unset args
args+='arg1 '
args+='arg2 '
args+='arg3 '
x=$(f $args)

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

add a commentÂ |Â

up vote
1
down vote

Why split the line at the equals sign? You can just set the arguments to the function in a separate variable:

unset args
args+='arg1 '
args+='arg2 '
args+='arg3 '
x=$(f $args)

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

Why split the line at the equals sign? You can just set the arguments to the function in a separate variable:

unset args
args+='arg1 '
args+='arg2 '
args+='arg3 '
x=$(f $args)

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

answered 2 hours ago

ewatt

31516

add a commentÂ |Â

draft saved

draft discarded

draft saved

draft discarded

Post as a guest

Name

Search This Blog

Iyfjky