[PATCH build 3/3] Use consistent parameter expansion notation.

[Matt Dew]

>> This diff is a perfect example of
>> it: 114 lines changed for zero functional difference.
>
> I agree! In my experience a patch like this in the "corporate" world
> would be completely rejected. It's a mortal sin to make non-functional
> changes to existing, tested, released code :-). Besides, who would
> want to pay a developer to format code? :-) I'm not some long-time
> open source developer, but it seems to me the culture on this side of
> the fence is a bit different.
>
> I don't have commit access (and am perfectly happy that way) so I'm
> relieved of the responsibility of having to make any decision one way
> or the other. People made suggestions, I had some free time, so I
> generated some patches :-D If nothing else I'm learning a lot of "git"
> along the way! :-D
>
> Best regards,
>    Trevor

Normally I'm all for consistency, but in this case I don't think it
matters.   The change seems unnecessary.

In the corporate world, no one gets paid to pretty up the code, which
is probably one reason why so much 'corporate' code is a nightmare to
look at.  ;)

Matt