Re: path PATH

[Roman Perepelitsa <roman.perepelitsa@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 8:51 PM Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 11:31 AM Roman Perepelitsa
> <roman.perepelitsa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Intuitively, I expected that `typeset -m pat` is equivalent
> > to `typeset -p [params]..` where `[params]..` is the names of all
> > parameters matching `pat`.
>
> You can get this by combining -p and -m, which I think is one reason
> why -m is different.

It's still weird. I would accept this reasoning if `typeset path`
produced the same output as `typeset -m path` but it doesn't.
Something feels off.

> > > (where I'm not even sure the (q) is necessary).
> >
> > I think it should be (b).
>
> Are there valid characters in an identifier name that would be quoted
> differently by (b) and (q)?

I don't know. I said it should be (b) because it would be correct by
design while (q) could only be correct by coincidence.

Roman.