*meOW*....talk about catty
Chet Ramey wrote:
On 7/22/13 9:07 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
The issue is whether or not attributes that determine how the assignment
should be treated (-a/-A) or how the variable should be created (-g) are
handled specially and affect how the value is expanded. The question
is why -i should be omitted from that list.
There is a fairly powerful argument for backwards compatibility here:
Dan's suggestion of a workaround by quoting the rhs of the assignment
statement is a good one.
I'm leaving things as they are for the time being.
Chet
