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

[Piotr Grzybowski]

Hi,

 I hope the attached patch does not break to much; it addresses the masking:

> declare -nt r=a; f() { declare a; declare -n r=a; declare -p a r; }; f

as per Grisha's report; it tries to enlighten make_local_variable to the 
existence of nameref by returning existing local nameref in scope (declare -n 
r=PATH; declare -n r; returns r with value of PATH) and by (hopefully) 
correctly making existing nameref take precedence over the dereferenced value.

 Would you please consider it?

cheers,
pg

masking_nameref_with_local_vars.patch
Description: Binary data

On 29 Apr 2016, at 03:49, Grisha Levit wrote:

> There is also an issue when doing something like `declare -n r=a' in a 
> function if the same has been done in a higher scope.  Instead of creating a 
> new variable r in the function's scope, it modifies the local `a' to be a 
> self-referencing nameref..
> 
> $ declare -nt r=a; f() { declare a; declare -n r=a; declare -p a r; }; f
> declare -n a="a"    # ??
> declare -nt r="a"   # note the -t.  this is the outer $r, a new one was not 
> created
> 
> In a slightly different version, with `declare -n r; r=a', the function exits 
> with code 1 after the `r=a' statement:
> 
> $ declare -nt r=a; f() { declare a; declare -n r; r=a; declare -p a r; }; f; 
> echo $?
> 1