On 22 May 2013 23:08, Irek Szczesniak <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Irek Szczesniak <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Dan Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Roland Mainz <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> >>>> Attached (as "astksh20130503_typeset_copy_operator001.diff.txt") is a >>>> small patch which provides a type-independent copy-by-name operator. >>> >>> Why are typeset options required to move/copy objects? >> >> typeset -m destname=srcname # move/rename variable >> typeset -c destname=srcname # copy variable >> >>> Don't namerefs >>> on positional parameters create reference variables (`&arg'/`ref arg' >>> from C++/C#) that refer directly to an object right? >> >> I don't grok this. Can you give an example, please? >> >>> If not ksh should >>> really have an explicit dereference operator instead. >> >> ksh93 has a dereference operator: ${!varname} returns the name a >> nameref is referring to. >> >>> `typeset -c' conflicts with Bash's (undocumented) "capcase" feature. >> >> 1. Its undocumented in bash(1). It never was and AFAIK never will be >> because it was an experiment >> 2. I can't find any scripts which use this feature, and in the light >> of ksh93's typeset -M it is redundant >> 3. Its not working properly outside ASCII (you can verify that the >> generated multibyte characters are garbage through AST wc -X) >> 4. ksh93 is not bash >> 5. typeset -m and typeset -c is much more useful than another damn >> make characters uppercase feature which can be implemented much easier >> through typeset -M, disciplines or other means >> >>> Also ksh fails on most of your examples if wrapped in a namespace. >> >> Yes, I noticed a few bugs. But if you follow the >> [email protected] closely you'll see that Roland is >> reporting bugs as they are found and per Roland's feedback on my own >> bug reports David Korn is fixing them for the next ast-ksh alpha. So >> no worries :) > > To clarify my point: I *like* the idea of having a generic > variable/array/type copying facility implemented using typeset -c. IMO > it is very very useful and simplifies *many* otherwise complex > programming tasks.
I like typeset -c too +1 Wendy _______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
