On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 05:21:05PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > Steven W. Orr wrote: > >Seriously, can we just put a trap on all messages to this list that have > >the string 'set -e' in it? Just point the sender to a message that tells > >them to not use it. > ---- > > Seriously -- why not just fix it?
Because POSIX has specified that it must be present, and that it must work in certain ways. This is because it is a legacy feature that has been around since the dark ages, and which all too many scripts are using (however poorly). My personal advice is the same as Steven's: don't use it. You're free to take that advice, or not to take it. Chet, on the other hand, is required(*) to implement set -e according to the ever-changing POSIX specifications, while simultaneously trying to mimic the historical behavior of bash and (where possible) of other Bourne/POSIX shells. It's a balancing act that I don't envy him for having to do. (*) "Required" insofar as he wants bash to remain POSIX compliant.
