On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 21:38 -0500, Eduardo Bustamante wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:32 PM, wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > I'd really like to see Bash get on the right side of this issue - and
> > the sooner the better.
> There is no right side. Only two opposing viewpoints. I don't think
> it's eno
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Eduardo Bustamante
wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:32 PM, wrote:
> [...]
> > I'd really like to see Bash get on the right side of this issue - and
> > the sooner the better.
>
> There is no right side. Only two opposing viewpoints. I don't think
> it's enough
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:32 PM, wrote:
[...]
> I'd really like to see Bash get on the right side of this issue - and
> the sooner the better.
There is no right side. Only two opposing viewpoints. I don't think
it's enough to justify the change breaking backwards compatibility.
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:08 PM, wrote:
[...]
> Anyway, I thought I'd float the idea and see if it might be a
> possibility.
Feel free to send patches.
Could you provide examples on how you expect this to be used? I'm
having a hard time trying to understand how this will be used.
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Pierre Gaston
wrote:
> >_ See:_
> >_
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2012-11/msg00040.html[https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2012-11/msg00040.html
[1]]_
> >_ Pierre_
> >_ PS: I'm with you ;)_
>
> Thanks for the link, I
Hi, I think this is probably kind of an unusual request, but you don't
get anything you don't ask for, right? So I figure it's worth a shot.
Basically, I am working on a library called shell-pepper (it's not too
far along at this point) - the general concept is that it's like a
grab-bag of functi
