> > It seems to me that the syntax for functions in ash and bash is
> > different
> > and incompatible.
>
> For example?
Ah.... I've had another look at this
bash _allows_ the round brackets as in
func2 ()
{
}
but on further examination, they are apparently redundant syntax!!!!!
( If that's right, would it be reasonable to make ash ignore them too -
it would allow easier porting to ash from bash. )
I must admit I had mistakenly thought that the way of invoking functions
with parameters in bash required use of round brackets, but I now see it
isn't so.
Thanks
David
> > I had assumed that was a fixed part of the universe, and
> > something I'd
> > have to live with.
>
> ash doesn't implement all bash stuff. I am trying to add more,
> but frankly, implementing all bashisms is not a sensible goal
> so far: some of them are pure featuritis, like <<<word
> redirection or `<file` hack: users can trivially use
> standard-compliant constructs instead.
>
> --
> vda
>
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
