Re: [patch] /* XXX - possibly run Coproc->name through word expansion? */

[Chet Ramey]

On 4/19/16 11:03 AM, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:

>     > - if it expands to a legal identifier create the coproc
> 
>     This isn't necessary; there's no reason to restrict a coproc name to
>     something stricter than the set of valid executable names.  I suppose
>     I could see restricting it to the same set of valid names as shell
>     functions. 
> 
> 
> ​ok, but I thought along these lines: if the name is not a valid
> identifier, how are you going to refer by this name to the array with the
> descriptors? but maybe checking legal_identifier is too much.

That's a really good point.  We can let people do unwise things (creating
coprocs with weird names) and not let them pollute the shell's namespace
at the same time.

Chet

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/