On 2/3/23 11:50 PM, Koichi Murase wrote:
2023年2月4日(土) 11:12 Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu>:
But a posix conforming shell will still never execute a function that
has a '/' in its name, even if it has extended the character set for
function names, and allows '/' in that set.
Yep. I'll probably change that.
I disagree with making the change to disallow the execution of
functions with a slash in their names.
We're only talking about posix mode here. Bash default mode will behave
as it has in the past.
Is Bash required to strictly follow the POSIX
standard even for non-POSIX shell scripts that use Bash extensions?
The standard doesn't have a provision for extensions there: shell functions
are only executed if the name does not contain a slash.
Is it impossible that this is
explicitly marked as `unspecified' in the standard?
It's not marked as unspecified.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
