On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chaze...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2014-12-10 06:33:00 +0800, konsolebox: > [...] >> > Not sure what you mean by that last sentence, but all of dash, >> > yash, mksh, pdksh, AT&T ksh, posh, zsh (so virtually all modern >> > Bourne-like shells) do support local scopes each with variations >> > of behaviour and syntax. >> >> I know ksh, pdksh and zsh supports local but I didn't know that dash >> does it too - or maybe I forgot. I always remember that it's a pure >> POSIX shell but apparently it's not. > > dash (and posh) follow (or at least used to) another standard, > the Debian policy which is more or less POSIX with a few > additions (from XSI, UP and its owns). > > ...
Thank you for the information. >> And sorry I actually meant >> "some other". Consider a more conservative shell like heirloom-sh. > [...] > > Note that that's the Bourne shell, not a POSIX sh. I was actually wanting to say that heirloom-sh is still a modernized shell (in code) despite being a strict clone of the original sh. I believe many people still base their scripts from it so I also see that as a shell to consider despite not being POSIX. > It's ironic that local scoping is now implemented in virtually > all POSIX shells but not specified by POSIX. And that is where I made the assumption about other shells. I don't really study POSIX and I don't really care about it because I don't see it as the general standard to base from when creating compatible scripts. Moreover I still respect bourne shell. See https://sourceforge.net/p/loader/code/ci/base/tree/loader.sh Cheers, konsolebox
