[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug: illegal function name?
From: |
Eduardo A . Bustamante López |
Subject: |
Re: bug: illegal function name? |
Date: |
Sun, 20 Jan 2019 19:50:35 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) |
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 09:26:59AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
(...)
> I think his point is that if unset "unset f" (no flags) works to unset
> function f, if f is not a (set) variable, then it should work every time
> "f" is not a set variable, not only the times when the word "f" happens
> to be of the correct syntax to be a variable name, but happens not
> to be.
>
> I think that is a good point.
>
> In the NetBSD sh we avoid that issue completely, the only way to
> unset a function is with "unset -f", a simple "unset f" only ever
> unsets variables.
I think that's a good point too. But how would you fix this particular issue?
Changing the behavior of `unset f' to only ever unset variables means
potentially breaking existing scripts. Is the inconsistency reported severe
enough to make this change?
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, (continued)
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Eduardo A . Bustamante López, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Andrey Butirsky, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Eduardo Bustamante, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Andrey Butirsky, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Eduardo Bustamante, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Chet Ramey, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Andrey Butirsky, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Robert Elz, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?,
Eduardo A . Bustamante López <=
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, pepa65, 2019/01/21
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Chet Ramey, 2019/01/21
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Robert Elz, 2019/01/20
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Andrey Butirsky, 2019/01/21
- Re: bug: illegal function name?, Chet Ramey, 2019/01/20