Re: currently doable? Indirect notation used w/a hash

[Chris Down]

On 14 Jun 2013 10:21, "Linda Walsh" <bash@tlinx.org> wrote:
>> Please, no more brittle export hacks. I'm already crying enough at
function exports.
>
>
> Brittle would be bad.  Pliant and chewy would be much better, I agree.
>
> Perhaps you might explain what you mean by brittle?  Like the export hacks
> you get in the Antarctic in June?  The word brittle with export doesn't
> seem to fit very well.  What happened to your functions?  Don't they work?

You are aware of *how* they work, yes? (with apologies for the terse
replies, I'm on my phone)