On Tue, Jan 07 2020, Klemens Nanni <k...@openbsd.org> wrote: > 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.
... the same as mksh. Sorry, that was misleading. >> 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. I do not intend to change the existing behavior of "function name". -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
