On 01/06/18 07:01, Eli Schwartz wrote: > On 05/31/2018 12:24 PM, Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) wrote: >> This causes package_$pkgname() to be preferred over package() in the >> non-split case, but the behavior if both functions exist was >> undocumented anyway. > > We don't document the behavior of arbitrary user-defined functions. > package_$pkgname() is only defined as having meaning in the context of > the PACKAGE SPLITTING section of the documentation. > > IMHO this is us documenting that package() is the only correct function > unless ${#pkgname[@]} > 1. > > I think it is far more intuitive to behave that way, and I'd actually be > willing to refuse to use package_$pkgname even if it is the only one... >
We discussed on IRC to abort if both are present as undefined behavoiur. Allan