Right now there are various optimization that we can do to be more aligned with shellcheck:

cd /tmp > /dev/null 2>&1 https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC2164

wget ${__0_download_url} https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC2086

if [ $(echo "!" $__AF_dir_exist4_v0__57 | bc -l | sed "/\./ s/\.\{0,1\}0\{1,\}$//") != 0 ]; then https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC2046

let index=${index}+1 https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC2219

So looking at the error below, everytime Amber print a variable it should wrap them. In this way various error are automatically fixed.

For cd is more difficult as requires something to add stuff based on the command parsed. Maybe this can be fixed with #178

I think that it will be cool if the bash generated is ShellCheck "approved".

Another Amber example:

move_to_bin(get_download_path("artempyanykh/marksman", 1), "marksman")

Generate this bash code:

 move_to_bin__41_v0 "${__AF_get_download_path40_v0__39_13}" "marksman";
 __AF_move_to_bin41_v0__39_1=$__AF_move_to_bin41_v0;
 echo $__AF_move_to_bin41_v0__39_1 > /dev/null 2>&1

For shellcheck the last like should be:

echo "$__AF_move_to_bin41_v0__39_1" > /dev/null 2>&1

We should add shellcheck tests for Amber compiled code and stdlib tests @Mte90

Yes when we will address all of them is something we can do

So seems that it is possible to use Shellcheck to autofix the errors that find it.

shellcheck -f diff file.sh | git apply

Basically generating a diff file and using git to apply, so in the meantime we can integrate it if the machine has the tool.
That integration should include also some tests that let us spot the issue that we didn"t addressed yet in Amber.

@Mte90 I want to make it right. Let"s make shellcheck tests on the bash code that gets produced by the Amber validity and stdlib tests