> > On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 15:30, Roy T. Fielding
> wrote:
> > But I went googling for differences and found a
> > pretty significant one:
> >
> > It looks like ksh88 uses dynamic scoping while
> ksh93
>
Opps I appologize for the missing data in the last message.
To get an idea of the significant numbers there was a thread
posted on this subject on research.att.com from David:
-------------
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject: Re: Re: functions and locals (was Re: ksh93 features that might
be considered)
* From: David Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:36:51 -0400 (EDT)
* Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> David Korn wrote:
> >
> > Another mistake I made in ksh88 was to use dynamic scoping. The
> > drawbacks to dynamical scoping were pointed out to me by some
> > programming language gurus. Since the type of scoping was
> > never defined anywhere in ksh88, ksh93 switched to static scoping.
>
> Did the switch cause many complaints? After further thought I am
> convinced that static scoping is the better of the two.
I received no complaints during the first year. Since then
I have received about one complaint a year about it.
Once I explain how to modify the script so that it can
work with both new and old version, I have not heard back.
----------------
If we consider risks how many prorpietary customers would
this affect on the ON release? Or is it difficult to come up
with numbers.
---Bob
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
