Re: grammar triviality with '&&'

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 2,  3:27am, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
}
} However "&& [ -e file2 ]" could constitute a list too. There is
} currently a parse error, but zsh could have an extension to accept
} it as being equivalent to: "[[ $? -eq 0 ]] && [ -e file2 ]". Would
} there be anything wrong with such an extension?

If nothing else, the errexit option would fail.  With errexit,

    false
    || anything

would never get beyond "false", whereas

    false || anything

proceeds at least through "anything".

You also get strange crap like

    while && this; do || if && that; then || thus; fi; done

which would mean what, exactly?

Finally if it's OK to have nothing before && / ||, then it would also be
syntactically OK to write

    && || && || && && ...

No.