1

Getting the error below as I'm sure my syntax is off somehow with the nested conditionals. Basically I don't want to send an empty message to my telegram_bot which throws an error if it detects empty message. The first IF just detects if its NULL which works. But the case on line 32 doesnt. 

xxx.sh: line 32: syntax error near unexpected token `)'
xxx.sh: line 32: `    *)       # contains nothing or only spaces'


 26 if  [ -z "$message" ]; then
 27         echo "Please pipe a message to me!"
 28 else
 29   case $message in
 30     *[!\ ]*) # contains non-space
 31         sendTelegram                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
 32     *)       # contains nothing or only spaces
 33         DO NOTHING...
 34   esac
 35 fi
Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

You need to terminate your case clauses:

case $message in
    *[!\ ]*) # contains non-space
        sendTelegram
    ;;                                                                                                                                                                                                          
    *)       # contains nothing or only spaces
        DO NOTHING..
    ;;
esac

Conditional Constructs

Each clause must be terminated with ;;, ;&, or ;;&.

If the ;; operator is used, no subsequent matches are attempted after the first pattern match. Using ;& in place of ;; causes execution to continue with the command-list associated with the next clause, if any. Using ;;& in place of ;; causes the shell to test the patterns in the next clause, if any, and execute any associated command-list on a successful match.

As Kusalananda points out you can actually skip the terminator in the last clause if you so desire.

Improve this answer
6
  • 1
    The ;; is not needed in the last branch. Commented Feb 22, 2019 at 22:32
  • @Kusalananda: TIL. I have always included it though, I don't think it should cause any issues, no? Commented Feb 22, 2019 at 22:33
  • 1
    No, there's nothing wrong with including it. It's just optional at the very end. Commented Feb 22, 2019 at 22:34
  • @ilkkachu POSIX grammar it is. Commented Feb 22, 2019 at 22:50
  • can i just leave my lines 32 and 33 out completely since I just want it to do nothing anyways? Commented Feb 22, 2019 at 22:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.