On Monday 2009 January 12 15:31:49 Shawn O. Pearce wrote: >"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Well, if the user want to run in "set -u" mode preventing it is bogus, >> IMO. We could use subshells and unset at the top of _git and _gitk >> functions, that would be only a +6/-4 patch. It would also not be >> something future contributors have to think (much) about. > >Running in subshells is a bad idea. Yeah, not only for all the reasons you mention, but because it would require refactoring to use -C instead of -F (so we a longer and uglier patch); our changes to COMPREPLY in the subshell wouldn't be seen by bash. Having tripped over my lack of experience twice in two messages in this thread, I'm going to bow out of the rest of it. My ascetic opinion still stands, but I'll take working code, warts and all, over broken code. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
