Sounds like a useful proposal with little (no?) downsides..!
Peter
On 27/02/2560 13:08, Martijn Dekker wrote:
> It is not clear to me why bash has two separate namespaces for
> long-named shell options, handled by two separate commands.
>
> It might make sense if 'set -o' is for POSIX options
It is not clear to me why bash has two separate namespaces for
long-named shell options, handled by two separate commands.
It might make sense if 'set -o' is for POSIX options only and 'shopt'
for bash-specific options, but that doesn't apply. I can't figure out a
consistent basis for a
