Re: declare [-+]n behavior on existing (chained) namerefs

[Piotr Grzybowski]

hi,

 this one is not present in current devel, I would consider it fixed already.

pg

On 29 Apr 2016, at 18:50, Grisha Levit wrote:

> I should note also that the behavior when inside a function matches exactly 
> what the manual says.  It’s the global namerefs that have this unexpected 
> behavior of following the chain to the end and and modifying only the last 
> nameref in the chain.
> 
> The only buggy behavior when inside of functions (ignoring scope issues) 
> seems to be that `declare -n ref’ unsets the value of $ref if it previously 
> pointed to a variable that is unset.
> 
> $ f() { unset var; declare -n ref=var; declare -n ref; declare
>  -p ref; }; f
> 
> declare -n ref     # why did the value of ref disappear?
> 
> 
> $ 
> f() { local var; declare -n ref=var; declare -n ref; declare
>  -p ref; }; f
> 
> declare -n ref="var"