Re: ksh: support "function name()"

[Klemens Nanni]

On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 06:47:16PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> Bah, I think I understand why this was chosen.  bash functions declared
> with "function name" or "function name()" aren't special.  Probably we
> should do the same.  I'm postponing this for now, thanks for the
> feedback so far.
I think we should keep differences between the two forms, having $0
expand to the function name is a nice feature I do use.