Op 17-03-17 om 23:08 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
> Martijn Dekker dixit:
>
>> Op 17-03-17 om 20:53 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
>>> Even mksh’s “global” builtin does not access the global scope.
>>> It’s simply a “typeset” that’s not also “local”.
>>
>> But why the separate builtin (which is unique to
Martijn Dekker dixit:
>Op 17-03-17 om 20:53 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
>> Even mksh’s “global” builtin does not access the global scope.
>> It’s simply a “typeset” that’s not also “local”.
>
>But why the separate builtin (which is unique to mksh, if I'm not
>mistaken) rather than 'typeset -g' as in
Op 17-03-17 om 20:53 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
> Even mksh’s “global” builtin does not access the global scope.
> It’s simply a “typeset” that’s not also “local”.
But why the separate builtin (which is unique to mksh, if I'm not
mistaken) rather than 'typeset -g' as in zsh, bash 4 and yash?
On 03/17/2017 12:07 PM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> Dan is describing what I can only explain as a bug or at least a
> very surprising feature:
The way Chet has described it in the past it sounded like an intentional
compromise to make outer scopes accessible without the also possibly
surprising
On 03/14/2017 05:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> So internally bash does make a difference between a variable being
> null and a variable being unset. A bash variable can actually have 4
> distinct states: non-existent, existent but unset, set but null, and
> non-null. "typeset", "local" and "unset"
