[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issues with exported functions

From: lolilolicon
Subject: Re: Issues with exported functions
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 04:06:43 +0800

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Greg Wooledge <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 03:44:23AM +0800, lolilolicon wrote:
>> Otherwise, if this feature is going to stay (can anyone enlighten me why
>> it's useful?), please document it explicitly.
> First, it is documented:
>       Functions may be exported so that subshells automatically have them
>       defined with the -f option to the export builtin.
> (Good luck finding that if you didn't know to look for it, though.)

Yeah, I did find that part. But it does not specify *how* it's done,
i.e. there is no mention of '() {', and by reading the above, one
wouldn't expect my first example to work.

> Second, it's "useful" in niche cases like this:
>   foo() { ...; }
>   export -f foo
>   find . -type f -exec bash -c 'for f; do foo "$f"; done' _ {} +

Oh, this command line feels so wrong...

> So, if Chet removes the feature, it would probably break something that
> someone cares about.  Maybe there could be a compile-time option to
> disable it.  Maybe there already is -- I didn't look.

I don't expect more than a dozen who rely on this... but bash
programmers can be quite the perverts, so...

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]