bug-bash
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: aliases v. functions; command extension? (-f & -F)?


From: Reuti
Subject: Re: aliases v. functions; command extension? (-f & -F)?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:08:43 +0100

> Am 11.01.2016 um 15:52 schrieb Chet Ramey <address@hidden>:
> 
> On 1/9/16 2:12 PM, Reuti wrote:
>> 
>> Am 08.01.2016 um 21:36 schrieb Piotr Grzybowski:
>> 
>>> hello Linda,
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Linda Walsh <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> For what it's worth, It might be useful to have something like
>>>> 'command' [..]
>>> 
>>> that would be useful, a keyword like:
>>> 
>>> function p params;
>> 
>> AFAICS putting the name in quotes (single or double) will prefer the 
>> function over the alias, but it will fall back to a command if there is no 
>> function.
>> 
>> 'P' params
> 
> Yes, quoting any part of a command name inhibits alias expansion, since the
> quotes remain as part of the word when alias expansion is performed.
> 
> 
>> Does:
>> 
>> type - a P
>> 
>> list them in order? It seems always to be in the order alias - function - 
>> command.
> 
> Yes.  The output is intended to show how a name would be resolved if used
> as a command.  The order is
> 
>       alias
>       reserved word
>       function
>       builtin
>       command hash table
>       PATH search

Great. May I suggest to add this table to the man page? In section "COMMAND 
EXECUTION" it's already explained in the text, but such a table would be handy.

-- Reuti


> Posix mode changes this slightly.
> 
> -- 
> ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
>                ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
> Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    address@hidden    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/




reply via email to

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