Re: Special PATH variable for sourcing scripts?

[Alan D. Salewski]

On 2024-04-22 02:12:08, Matheus Afonso Martins Moreira 
<matheus@matheusmoreira.com> spake thus:
> > Instead of diving into the semantics of what counts as a "library,"
> > how about we just consider different variable names? BASH_SOURCE_PATH?
> > SOURCE_PATH?
>
> Sure. I think BASH_SOURCE_PATH is great.
> It denotes the fact it is specific to
> both bash and the source builtin.
>
> > Sourcing reusable code seems fine.
>
> I agree, the source builtin is good.
> It can even pass arguments to the scripts.
>
> > How else would it work?
>
> I suppose creating a dedicated builtin for this
> is also an option. Just like the enable builtin
> which I saw in the documentation. I thought that
> was where discussion was heading for a moment there.

Creating a wrapper around 'bash' could also work (maybe call it 
'runbash'?), similar to how 'runawk'[0] wraps 'awk' to add support 
for modules (and other things).

-Al


[0] https://github.com/cheusov/runawk
    https://sourceforge.net/projects/runawk/

--
a l a n   d.   s a l e w s k i
ads@salewski.email
salewski@att.net
https://github.com/salewski