When our interpretation of the specification creates orders of magnitude more problems than it solves, yes.
This should not in any way be construed as meaning that anything goes. Thanks, -- Raul On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Theo de Raadt <dera...@openbsd.org> wrote: >> (2) Given that POSIX is an incomplete specification, why is POSIX the >> issue here? > > What does 'incomplete specification' mean. > > You mean incompatible extensions should be added, quite similar to the > damage bash creates in the ecosystem with it's incompatible extensions? >
