Jay Taylor's notes

shell - Difference between parentheses and braces in terminal? - Unix & Linux Stack Exchange

Original source (unix.stackexchange.com)

Tags: bash shell-scripting curly-braces parenthesis nuances unix.stackexchange.com

Clipped on: 2020-12-14

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 176 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Visit Stack Exchange

current community
- Unix & Linux
  
  help chat log out
- Unix & Linux Meta
your communities
edit
more stack exchange communities
company blog

Jobs

Difference between parentheses and braces in terminal? [duplicate]

Ask Question

Asked 4 years, 9 months ago

Active 4 years, 9 months ago

Viewed 6k times

This question already has answers here:

What are the shell's control and redirection operators? (3 answers)

bash if not multiple conditions without subshell? (7 answers)

Closed 4 years ago.

( du /etc; du /var; ) > tmp.txt

{ du /etc; du /var; } > tmp.txt

Is there a difference between the () and {}?

The output of tmp.txt seems exactly the same, and I was wondering whether i'm missing something here.

shell

share | edit | | flag |

edited Mar 4 '16 at 21:26

See Grouping Commands under 2.9.4 Compound Commands – don_crissti Mar 4 '16 at 17:10

try inserting exit ; between the du. – Archemar Mar 4 '16 at 17:10

This is the closest answer I found in the web. The exact issue has not been explained in this site. – user79743 Mar 4 '16 at 18:30

Both of them are Grouping Commands, but { list; } executes commands in current shell environment. – user79743 Mar 4 '16 at 18:31

add a comment |

1 Answer

Active Oldest Votes

Parentheses cause the commands to be run in a subshell.

Braces cause the commands to be grouped together but not in a subshell.

Given that your example does not use side-effects, there is no real difference between both. If there were side-effects, e.g. setting or modifying shell variables, there is a difference as such side-effects applied to a sub-shell will be forgotten when this sub-shell ends.

If you however take a closer look and compare the behavior of different shell implementations, it becomes confusing:

The Bourne Shell e.g. runs grouped commands in a subshell in case there is an I/O redirection and ksh93 avoids subshells by implementing virtual subshell behavior that is done by creating a temporary copy of new parameters. Whether this is always 100% correct is not known, ksh93 Version M 1993-12-28 s+ from 2009 e.g. implements $(...) incorrectly and $(alias a=b) affects the main shell.

So in general: if you are interested in specific aspects, be careful and check your shell for it's actual behavior.

share | edit | | flag |

edited Mar 4 '16 at 17:35

answered Mar 4 '16 at 17:07

(I wouldn't have bothered mentioning it but since you're maintaining a Bourne shell ;)), ...not in a subshell, except for the Bourne shell that runs compound commands in subshells when redirected. – Stéphane Chazelas Mar 4 '16 at 17:11

Well parentheses grant the commands to be in a subshell, with braces, it still may happen ;-) but ksh93 does not even create a real subshell for parentheses, but rather emulates the effects of a subshell by using a temporary new copy of parameters. – schily Mar 4 '16 at 17:14

Yes, you'll notice that the POSIX spec is careful to talk only of subshell environment with no implication that it may involve a child process. And with many shells that implement subshells using a child process, (a;b) will not spawn more processes than {a;b;} (if b is not a builtin nor function nor compound command and there's no local trap) as b will be executed in that child subshell process. – Stéphane Chazelas Mar 4 '16 at 17:20

So if I understand correctly, the only difference is that: parentheses use a subshell and braces don't? And the output stays the same, regardless of the subshell (in this case). Thankyou, this helped! – Nelske Mar 4 '16 at 17:32