Re: RFE? request for an "undefined" attribute for functions

[Bernd Eggink]

Am 02.08.2010 20:16, schrieb Eric Blake:
> On 08/02/2010 12:15 PM, Bernd Eggink wrote:
> > Am 02.08.2010 19:15, schrieb Andreas Schwab:
> > > Bernd Eggink<monoped@sudrala.de>   writes:
> > >
> > > >           eval "function $name
> > >
> > > Don't use function, use "$name ()" instead.
> >
> > What's wrong with function??
>
> 'function name' is a bash extension while 'name()' is POSIX.  If you use
> standard POSIX instead of bash extensions, then your approach will more
> easily port to other POSIX shells.

It's not just a bash extension. Ksh and zsh also have the 'function' 
keyword, probably other shells as well. I prefer it in ksh because it 
makes locally declared variables really local, while with the name() 
syntax they are shared with the environment. That's one reason why it 
became a habit. The other is that 'function' is clear and 
self-explaining, while 'name()' wrongly suggests that function 
parameters should be surrounded by parentheses.
Apart from that, I can't see why I should care for POSIX when writing 
bash-specific hacks.

Regards,
Bernd

--
Bernd Eggink
http://sudrala.de