4 Şubat 2023 Cumartesi tarihinde Koichi Murase <myoga.mur...@gmail.com> yazdı:
> Wouldn't it be possible to make the result of defining the function > names with slashes unspecified in a similar idea? If you mean like declaring that a shell's overall behavior be unspecified once a function with a name that wouldn't make a valid variable name defined or something like that, then yeah, I guess they could say that in the standard. But then how would you execute a program that resides in, for example, the current directory portably? `(exec ./program)`? I don't think that's a good idea. I don't have any personal reason to support or not support what you propose, but that names of functions and pathnames of executables can clash even under POSIX mode doesn't feel right. I'm not against periods and colons in function names though. -- Oğuz
