I like the idea in theory, however it doesn’t feel very robust – you are relying on the layout of the page in question. Many authors regularly revisit articles and add new sections and paragraphs. Now your #h2:3 link points to a previous section. (This is far less likely to happen with IDs.)

@H2CO3 Why did you remove your answer? It was the only one explaining what was happening. Or was it incorrect?

The question talks about stdout but the title mentions stdin. I think the title is wrong.

Note: This question has been edited since it was asked. The original title was "Test whether a glob has any matches in bash". The specific shell, 'bash', was dropped from the question after I published my answer. The editing of the question's title makes my answer appear to be in error. I hope someone can amend or at least address this change.

"that text has been removed from the official version on the Apache site." This itself is also not good. If you post "official" records but then quietly edit them over time, I have no choice but to assume bad faith in all the records I'm shown by you. Why should I believe anything Apache board members claim was "minuted" but which in fact it turns out they might have just edited into their records days, weeks or years later? One of the things I particularly watch for in modern news media (where no physical artefact captures whatever "mistakes" are published as once happened with newspapers) is whether when they inevitably correct a mistake they _acknowledge_ that or they instead just silently change things.