Re: posix vs default mode nonsense

[Chet Ramey]

On 10/21/24 9:54 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
>  From the earlier message (just replying to this one to get the
> new Subject: which fits better)...
>
> zsanter@gmail.com said:
>    | I can work around function names needing to be valid shell 'name's by
>
> That one bash could easily fix if it wanted to, there's never been a
> POSIX requirement that only "name"s can be used as function names.

No, the original 1992 standard required it:

"The function is named fname; it shall be a name (see 3.1.5)."

That changed to an application requirement in 2001.

--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature