Re: problem with bash script loading

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018, Chet Ramey wrote: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2018-09/msg00023.html Not sure if I understood everything, so allow me to quote you, from http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2018-09/msg00024.html ... It's been there even since I wrote the buf

Identical function names in bash source code

Hi, It is not uncommon to see the same name is used to defined functions in different .c files in bash source code. For example, sh_single_quote is defined in both lib/readline/shell.c and lib/sh/shquote.c with the exact same signature. The two pieces of code are slightly different. Do they do th

Re: Identical function names in bash source code

On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 08:19:38AM -0600, Peng Yu wrote: > Hi, > > It is not uncommon to see the same name is used to defined functions > in different .c files in bash source code. > > For example, sh_single_quote is defined in both lib/readline/shell.c > and lib/sh/shquote.c with the exact same

Re: Identical function names in bash source code

for my 2c, the post seems within the charter. quoting from the bug-bash info page: > This list distributes, to the active maintainers of BASH (the Bourne Again > SHell), bug reports and fixes for, and *suggestions for improvements in > BASH. *

Re: Identical function names in bash source code

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 10:25 AM don fong wrote: > > for my 2c, the post seems within the charter. > > quoting from the bug-bash info > page: > > > This list distributes, to the active maintainers of BASH (the Bourne Again > > SHell), bug reports and

Re: Identical function names in bash source code

> What would you say the "suggested improvement" is here? This is implied. If it is agreed that identical function names are not good by the majority of bash developers, then what I found could be turned into an explicit suggestion. Since maybe there is a good reason, I don't want to pretend that

Re: Identical function names in bash source code

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 11:38 AM Peng Yu wrote: > > > What would you say the "suggested improvement" is here? > > This is implied. If it is agreed that identical function names are not > good by the majority of bash developers, then what I found could be > turned into an explicit suggestion. > > Si

Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:12 PM Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote: (...) > 2. Performance impact > > The new RNG does more work, and thus, it is expected to have a performance > impact when generating lots of random numbers. I tested 3 systems (2 amd64 > and 1 > armhf) and include the results bel

"return" should not continue script execution, even if used inappropriately

To the most excellent bash maintainers: I have found, what I consider to be a bug, in the following version of bash: * bash-4.4.23-1.fc28.x86_64 It is related to this error message: * "return: can only `return' from a function or sourced script" When used inappropriately (such as running a cor