2021年4月13日(火) 0:16 Chet Ramey :
> On 4/6/21 12:46 PM, Koichi Murase wrote:
> > Looking at another thread
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2021-04/threads.html#00051,
> > I'm now also interested in how we can handle the indirect expansions
> > for 'a[@]' and the namerefs for 'a[@]':
>
2021年4月13日(火) 18:01 Koichi Murase :
> 2021年4月13日(火) 0:16 Chet Ramey :
> > On 4/6/21 12:46 PM, Koichi Murase wrote:
> > > Looking at another thread
> > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2021-04/threads.html#00051,
> > > I'm now also interested in how we can handle the indirect expansions
On 4/13/21 5:01 AM, Koichi Murase wrote:
2021年4月13日(火) 0:16 Chet Ramey :
On 4/6/21 12:46 PM, Koichi Murase wrote:
Looking at another thread
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2021-04/threads.html#00051,
I'm now also interested in how we can handle the indirect expansions
for 'a[@]' and
Fix a bug in attempt_shell_completion() since 4.3-beta that allows the
programmable completion code to override a prior decision made by
attempt_shell_completion() that command completion is >not< to be used.
A test case (the simplest of two possible) follows.
Please Reply-To-All.
Thanks.
Marc.
On 2021/04/06 08:52, Greg Wooledge wrote:
In that case, I have no qualms about proposing that unset 'a[@]' and
unset 'a[*]' be changed to remove only the array element whose key is
'@' or '*', respectively, and screw backward compatibility. The current
behavior is pointless and is nothing but a
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 6:37 AM L A Walsh wrote:
> So echo ${a[@]} = expansion of all, but
> unset a[@] would only delete 1 element w/key '@'
> how do I echo 1 element with key '@'
Indeed we can only quote:
a['@']=1234
echo "${a['@']}"
unset "a['@']"
Or have it interpreted as a value of
On 4/13/21 6:36 PM, L A Walsh wrote:
So echo ${a[@]} = expansion of all, but
unset a[@] would only delete 1 element w/key '@'
how do I echo 1 element with key '@'
Creating arbitrary definitions of behavior for the similar syntax
seems like a sign of random feature-ism.
The behavio
2021年4月14日(水) 0:24 Chet Ramey :
> On 4/13/21 5:01 AM, Koichi Murase wrote:
> > But I expected some design consideration enabling a[$key] for an
> > arbitrary key in the indirect expansions and namerefs.
>
> Why? Why should the shell carry around (and expect the user to remember)
> information about
> But, If `assoc_expand_once' is needed
> to make the behavior more friendly to naive users, I think we should
> also take care of naive users who write « iref='a[$key]'; echo
> ${!iref} ».
Sorry, typo of "naive users who write « iref=a[$key]; echo ${!iref} »".
