bash: test: no: integer expression expected [duplicate]

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1













This question already has an answer here:



  • Bash - Integer expression expected

    2 answers



I believe this line



if test "$suman_inspect" -eq "yes"; then


is causing this error (verbatim):



bash: test: no: integer expression expected


I formulated the above test expression because I saw this example online:



 if test "$#" -eq "0"; then


where this test checks to see if the length of the arguments array is 0.



So is there something wrong with both these checks? I am not sure I understand how the first could be valid but the second one invalid.







share|improve this question














marked as duplicate by Jeff Schaller, steeldriver, Thomas Dickey, Stephen Rauch, G-Man Nov 10 '17 at 2:02


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:04














up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1













This question already has an answer here:



  • Bash - Integer expression expected

    2 answers



I believe this line



if test "$suman_inspect" -eq "yes"; then


is causing this error (verbatim):



bash: test: no: integer expression expected


I formulated the above test expression because I saw this example online:



 if test "$#" -eq "0"; then


where this test checks to see if the length of the arguments array is 0.



So is there something wrong with both these checks? I am not sure I understand how the first could be valid but the second one invalid.







share|improve this question














marked as duplicate by Jeff Schaller, steeldriver, Thomas Dickey, Stephen Rauch, G-Man Nov 10 '17 at 2:02


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:04












up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1






1






This question already has an answer here:



  • Bash - Integer expression expected

    2 answers



I believe this line



if test "$suman_inspect" -eq "yes"; then


is causing this error (verbatim):



bash: test: no: integer expression expected


I formulated the above test expression because I saw this example online:



 if test "$#" -eq "0"; then


where this test checks to see if the length of the arguments array is 0.



So is there something wrong with both these checks? I am not sure I understand how the first could be valid but the second one invalid.







share|improve this question















This question already has an answer here:



  • Bash - Integer expression expected

    2 answers



I believe this line



if test "$suman_inspect" -eq "yes"; then


is causing this error (verbatim):



bash: test: no: integer expression expected


I formulated the above test expression because I saw this example online:



 if test "$#" -eq "0"; then


where this test checks to see if the length of the arguments array is 0.



So is there something wrong with both these checks? I am not sure I understand how the first could be valid but the second one invalid.





This question already has an answer here:



  • Bash - Integer expression expected

    2 answers









share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 10 '17 at 0:55

























asked Nov 10 '17 at 0:44









Alexander Mills

1,9441029




1,9441029




marked as duplicate by Jeff Schaller, steeldriver, Thomas Dickey, Stephen Rauch, G-Man Nov 10 '17 at 2:02


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






marked as duplicate by Jeff Schaller, steeldriver, Thomas Dickey, Stephen Rauch, G-Man Nov 10 '17 at 2:02


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.













  • Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:04
















  • Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:04















Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 1:04




Both test expressions in the question are invalid - to compare strings you need to use the == operator, not the -eq operator
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 1:04










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










Note that -eq is for integer comparisons. For string comparisons, use == (or =). Thus, you should use the following:



if test "$suman_inspect" == "yes"; then
# do something
fi


The same distinction applies for inequality operators (-gt, -lt, -ge, -le, and -ne being used for numerical comparisons, and >, <, >=, <=, and != being used for string comparisons).



Note that you can also use [ expression ] in place of test expression; the two are synonymous.






share|improve this answer






















  • yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:54










  • @Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
    – user001
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:57











  • no language is perfect lol
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:03










  • @AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
    – Gordon Davisson
    Nov 10 '17 at 3:06

















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
3
down vote



accepted










Note that -eq is for integer comparisons. For string comparisons, use == (or =). Thus, you should use the following:



if test "$suman_inspect" == "yes"; then
# do something
fi


The same distinction applies for inequality operators (-gt, -lt, -ge, -le, and -ne being used for numerical comparisons, and >, <, >=, <=, and != being used for string comparisons).



Note that you can also use [ expression ] in place of test expression; the two are synonymous.






share|improve this answer






















  • yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:54










  • @Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
    – user001
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:57











  • no language is perfect lol
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:03










  • @AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
    – Gordon Davisson
    Nov 10 '17 at 3:06














up vote
3
down vote



accepted










Note that -eq is for integer comparisons. For string comparisons, use == (or =). Thus, you should use the following:



if test "$suman_inspect" == "yes"; then
# do something
fi


The same distinction applies for inequality operators (-gt, -lt, -ge, -le, and -ne being used for numerical comparisons, and >, <, >=, <=, and != being used for string comparisons).



Note that you can also use [ expression ] in place of test expression; the two are synonymous.






share|improve this answer






















  • yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:54










  • @Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
    – user001
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:57











  • no language is perfect lol
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:03










  • @AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
    – Gordon Davisson
    Nov 10 '17 at 3:06












up vote
3
down vote



accepted







up vote
3
down vote



accepted






Note that -eq is for integer comparisons. For string comparisons, use == (or =). Thus, you should use the following:



if test "$suman_inspect" == "yes"; then
# do something
fi


The same distinction applies for inequality operators (-gt, -lt, -ge, -le, and -ne being used for numerical comparisons, and >, <, >=, <=, and != being used for string comparisons).



Note that you can also use [ expression ] in place of test expression; the two are synonymous.






share|improve this answer














Note that -eq is for integer comparisons. For string comparisons, use == (or =). Thus, you should use the following:



if test "$suman_inspect" == "yes"; then
# do something
fi


The same distinction applies for inequality operators (-gt, -lt, -ge, -le, and -ne being used for numerical comparisons, and >, <, >=, <=, and != being used for string comparisons).



Note that you can also use [ expression ] in place of test expression; the two are synonymous.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Nov 10 '17 at 1:04

























answered Nov 10 '17 at 0:52









user001

1,47231936




1,47231936











  • yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:54










  • @Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
    – user001
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:57











  • no language is perfect lol
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:03










  • @AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
    – Gordon Davisson
    Nov 10 '17 at 3:06
















  • yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:54










  • @Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
    – user001
    Nov 10 '17 at 0:57











  • no language is perfect lol
    – Alexander Mills
    Nov 10 '17 at 1:03










  • @AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
    – Gordon Davisson
    Nov 10 '17 at 3:06















yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 0:54




yeah it's a shame the -eq operator cannot compare two strings, as long as both arguments are already strings, oh well.
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 0:54












@Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
– user001
Nov 10 '17 at 0:57





@Alexander Mills: I have long thought that eq, being a string, should be used for string comparisons, while =, being a mathematical symbol, should be used for numerical comparisons, but alas it's not the case.
– user001
Nov 10 '17 at 0:57













no language is perfect lol
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 1:03




no language is perfect lol
– Alexander Mills
Nov 10 '17 at 1:03












@AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
– Gordon Davisson
Nov 10 '17 at 3:06




@AlexanderMills String and integer comparisons are different, so it's important to have different symbols for them. For instance, [ 05 -eq 5 ] is true, but [ 05 = 5 ] is not -- they're different strings that represent the same integer. Also, [ 5 -lt 11 ] is true, but [ 5 '<' 11 ] is not, because 5 is less than 11 numerically, but comes after it "alphabetically" (i.e. in sorting order). BTW, = is preferred over == with test and [ ], for compatibility reasons.
– Gordon Davisson
Nov 10 '17 at 3:06


Popular posts from this blog

How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

Bahrain

Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay