On 8/9/11 8:53 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 08:14 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 8/8/11 9:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 08, 2011 21:20:29 Chet Ramey wrote:
>>>> On 8/8/11 8:53 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>>> However, you are on to something - since bash allows 'exit -1' as an
>>>>> extension, it should similarly allow 'return -1' as the same sort of
>>>>> extension. The fact that bash accepts 'exit -1' and 'exit -- -1', but
>>>>> only 'return -- -1', is the real point that you are complaining about.
>>>>
>>>> That's a reasonable extension to consider for the next release of bash.
>>>
>>> i posted a patch for this quite a while ago. not that it's hard to code.
>>
>> Sure. It's just removing the three lines of code that were added
>> between bash-3.2 and bash-4.0. The question was always whether that's
>> the right thing to do, and whether the result will behave as Posix
>> requires.
>
> Yes, the result will behave as POSIX requires.
That's not exactly what I meant. I know what Posix says. The question is
whether or not the code does that, and that's what I have to verify. The
change went in (three years ago) to solve a specific issue, so I have to
make sure we're not going backwards here.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU c...@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
