On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 03:12:15PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: > In article <25442.1494227...@andromeda.noi.kre.to>, > Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> wrote: > >In this message ... > [...] > > > >This one I think (though I have not tried it) is implementable, though > >with more work than the option version, but to me appears a little cleaner > >and removes both of the questions above - no new option means no need > >to invent a name for it, and no need to consider its default value. > >It would mean that the bash, ksh93, /bin/ksh, ... interpretation of how > >LINENO works in functions embedded in scripts would be adopted by > >default though. > > > >So, what does everyone think about that way? > > meaning that $LINENO is always the physical line number of the script > regardless if we are in a function or not (which is I guess what ksh/bash do)?
What happens if I pull in a shell function library with "."? Do I get line numbers per-file, or does the inclusion cause line numbers to appear to jump _within_ the file that included, or...? -- Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com "We cannot usually in social life pursue a single value or a single moral aim, untroubled by the need to compromise with others." - H.L.A. Hart
