Article View: gnu.bash.bug
Article #1074Re: Strange behavior with functions
From: Chet Ramey
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1989 01:38
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1989 01:38
26 lines
1540 bytes
1540 bytes
In article <8912201910.AA16864@.reed.bitnet> trost%REED.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU writes:
>bash$ cat rv
> rv () {
> [ $# = 0 ] && {
> # Call this block A
> local line=empty\?\?\?
I seem to have not fixed this completely, or maybe I'm just confused. I
did fix the longjmp botch problem, but I don't think this line is doing
what everyone thinks it should be doing. The `local' part works simply
because rv is a function, and you can declare local variables in a function.
The `{' doesn't really begin a new block with a separate context; on the
contrary, it guarantees that the block will be executed in the *current*
shell, with the *current* context.
Anyway, I don't think it should work as written. This isn't C. (If everyone
else thinks otherwise, I'm pretty sure I have a fix for it. But I'm just not
convinced that it ever should have worked.)
Chet Ramey
--
Chet Ramey
Network Services Group "Where's my froggie?"
Case Western Reserve University
chet@ins.CWRU.Edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1989Dec21.013833.6811@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cwns1!chetReferences:
<8912201910.AA16864@.reed.bitnet>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cwns1!chet From: chet@cwns1.CWRU.EDU (Chet Ramey) Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug Subject: Re: Strange behavior with functions Message-ID: <1989Dec21.013833.6811@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> Date: 21 Dec 89 01:38:33 GMT References: <8912201910.AA16864@.reed.bitnet> Reply-To: chet@po.CWRU.Edu () Distribution: gnu Organization: Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Lines: 26