On 10/2/22 4:51 AM, Daniel Castro wrote:
Bash Version: 5.0
Patch Level: 17
Release Status: release
Description:
declare -F yields the wrong line number for a function that has
nested functions declared within. Instead it gives the line number of
the last nested f
Hi Koichi,
> (This is just a side note about `local -' but unrelated to the main
> discussion): I didn't mention it because I thought `set -e' is merely
> an example to demonstrate the behavior of `defer', but if the handling
> of `set -e' is one of the main motivations for requesting `defer', I
Thank you for your reply and sorry for the late reply.
2022年10月4日(火) 0:56 Chet Ramey :
> > I expect the same behavior of `f1' and `f2' as far as there are no
> > background jobs.
>
> Why? f2 calls `jobs', and so requests information in a particular format,
> which may or may not be the same format
Hi Cynthia, thank you for your reply.
2022年10月8日(土) 17:26 Cynthia Coan :
> > I agree the proper implementation of `defer' by the RETURN trap could
> > be tricky (as described in "notes" in my previous reply), but it's
> > definitely not as hard as you initially posted (one 12-line function
> > vs
8 Ekim 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Cynthia Coan yazdı:
>
> [...] I think
> use cases outside of cleanup are relatively sparse, [...]
There. There already are several ways to do cleanup on exit/return using
existing features, why add one more?
> [...] With your syntax you still have to be aware of
Hi Koichi,
> I did notice your link to the Gist example, but I have to say that it
> misuses the RETURN trap. As I have written in the previous reply, the
> RETURN trap is already designed to be function-local so that it suits
> your use cases. However, the Gist version somehow disables the
> func
Hi Lawrence,
2022年10月8日(土) 16:04 Lawrence Velázquez :
> On Sat, Oct 8, 2022, at 2:11 AM, Koichi Murase wrote:
> > [...]. One thing to note is that the RETURN trap
> > should be cleaned up inside the RETURN trap itself by running `trap -
> > RETURN', or otherwise the RETURN trap is erroneously cons
Let me update the example implementation of ``defer''. I think this is
more readable:
function defer {
local trap
eval "trap=($(trap -p RETURN))"
trap -- "
if [[ \$FUNCNAME != defer ]]; then
trap - RETURN
$1
${trap[2]-}
fi" RETURN
}
declare -ft defer
I also tested
Hi Cynthia,
2022年10月8日(土) 15:56 Cynthia Coan :
> I'm well aware that "defer"/"safe trap appending" can be implemented
> today as it stands (see the original email in this chain, which links
> to an example that I've used in a more reduced form).
I did notice your link to the Gist example, but I h
On Sat, Oct 8, 2022, at 2:11 AM, Koichi Murase wrote:
> 2022年10月8日(土) 12:04 Cynthia Coan :
>> [...]
>>
>> Otherwise, I think we can perhaps reword this into two smaller
>> features: "function local trap signals",
>
> The existing RETURN trap is exactly the trap that can be used to clean
> up resour
> I don't think this would be a feature worth the time to implement and
> the complexity it would introduce. Is there any other use case for this
> than cleaning up temporary files on function return?
Yeah! I think that's a fair point since it seems like we're landing on
traps being the way forwar
11 matches
Mail list logo
