On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 11:45:13 -0500
christopher barry <cba...@rajant.com> wrote:
> I am in fact using this method with associative arrays.
> I have a default hash that is full of default values for a particular
> generic type of thing. Variations of this thing use many of the
> defaults, but also set some values uniquely. I could simply duplicate
> this hash everywhere, and edit the differences, but then changing
> any defaults would require a change everywhere.
> As an alternative, I created a template hash that all non-default
> things start out with.
> this template hash has all of it's values pointing to
> new things that need to change their specific values simply override
> that and put in their string.
> Now, changes to actual values in default_hash are seen everywhere they
> are not overridden locally by the specific thing using it.
> so reading a hash value may be an indirect pointer to the default_hash
> or an overridden value set by the specific thing using the hash.
> ivar solves this nicely.
> But to get back on point, the bug in bash was nasty, and it's
> fantastic that it's fixed now, but throwing an error now, rather than
> simply returning 1 with no data is a bit like throwing the baby out
> with the bathwater.
Does modifying this current behavior sound like anything you would be
willing to entertain?
Appreciate your consideration,