Andreas Schwab wrote:
Maarten Billemont writes:
On 15 Apr 2012, at 03:21, Chet Ramey wrote:
If I declare a variable readonly at global scope, I wouldn't expect it
to be overridden by some local namespace pollution.
I think that's fine; in the local context, your variable has a
different m
Maarten Billemont writes:
> On 15 Apr 2012, at 03:21, Chet Ramey wrote:
>>
>> If I declare a variable readonly at global scope, I wouldn't expect it
>> to be overridden by some local namespace pollution.
>
> I think that's fine; in the local context, your variable has a
> different meaning; it's
On 15 Apr 2012, at 03:21, Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> If I declare a variable readonly at global scope, I wouldn't expect it
> to be overridden by some local namespace pollution.
I think that's fine; in the local context, your variable has a different
meaning; it's another variable with the same name.
On 4/13/12 8:50 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
>
> Chet Ramey wrote:
>
>> This is intended. Bash doesn't allow a local copy of a variable to
>> override a readonly global one. This can be a potential security hole,
>
> ---
> You can look at it that way, but it also hinders modular programming.
>
>
Chet Ramey wrote:
This is intended. Bash doesn't allow a local copy of a variable to
override a readonly global one. This can be a potential security hole,
---
You can look at it that way, but it also hinders modular programming.
If I declare a variable to be local, I wouldn't expect it t
On 4/12/12 4:43 PM, dethrophes wrote:
> have you tried local?
> I'm not sure if it'll make a difference.
It won't.
> I don't agree that typeset/declare should be able to override/redefine a
> readonly variable it would defeat the purpose in a way.
I described the (hybrid/compromise) bash behavi
On 4/12/12 4:11 PM, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> It took me a second to reproduce it, but here it is:
>
> --
> #! /bin/bash
>
> A()
> {
> typeset v1=Hello
>
> B
> echo "IN B:$v1"
> }
>
> B()
> {
> typeset -r v1=Goodbye
>
> :
> }
> typeset -r v1=abc
> A
> echo
Am 12.04.2012 22:38, schrieb Steven W. Orr:
On 4/12/2012 4:21 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 22:11, schrieb Steven W. Orr:
On 4/12/2012 2:16 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 14:27, schrieb Chet Ramey:
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
I've also noticed weird behavior with "declar
On 4/12/2012 4:21 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 22:11, schrieb Steven W. Orr:
On 4/12/2012 2:16 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 14:27, schrieb Chet Ramey:
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
I've also noticed weird behavior with "declare -gr" the r sometimes seems
to override the
On 4/12/12 4:21 PM, dethrophes wrote:
> I don't think it helps me but thanks for the try.
> I would say zhats correct behavior. the code in the functions is only
> executed when you call the functions. So the first executed readonly
> variable is preserved.
> Anyway my problem isn't with how reado
Am 12.04.2012 22:11, schrieb Steven W. Orr:
On 4/12/2012 2:16 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 14:27, schrieb Chet Ramey:
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
I've also noticed weird behavior with "declare -gr" the r sometimes
seems
to override the g, but not specific to functions It seem
On 4/12/2012 2:16 PM, dethrophes wrote:
Am 12.04.2012 14:27, schrieb Chet Ramey:
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
I've also noticed weird behavior with "declare -gr" the r sometimes seems
to override the g, but not specific to functions It seems to be specific
either to the source file or
Am 12.04.2012 14:27, schrieb Chet Ramey:
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
I've also noticed weird behavior with "declare -gr" the r sometimes seems
to override the g, but not specific to functions It seems to be specific
either to the source file or to the compound statement. I haven't bee
On 4/11/12 2:50 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> "declare" when used in a function acts like "local", and creates a variable
> with scope local to that function. So does "declare -r". But "readonly",
> which is otherwise the same as "declare -r", creates variables with global
> scope.
>
> Is this inte
On 4/11/12 4:12 PM, dethrophes wrote:
> I've also noticed weird behavior with "declare -gr" the r sometimes seems
> to override the g, but not specific to functions It seems to be specific
> either to the source file or to the compound statement. I haven't been able
> to figure out exactly whats g
Am 11.04.2012 20:50, schrieb Greg Wooledge:
"declare" when used in a function acts like "local", and creates a variable
with scope local to that function. So does "declare -r". But "readonly",
which is otherwise the same as "declare -r", creates variables with global
scope.
Is this intended?
"declare" when used in a function acts like "local", and creates a variable
with scope local to that function. So does "declare -r". But "readonly",
which is otherwise the same as "declare -r", creates variables with global
scope.
Is this intended?
Tested with 2.05b, 3.something, and 4.2.20.
17 matches
Mail list logo
