Re: PATCH: Re: Compsys and KSH_AUTOLOAD

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Apr 17,  9:51pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: Compsys and KSH_AUTOLOAD
}
} > Test Test/B02typeset.ztst failed: bad status 0, expected 1 from: declare +m
} 
} That's this test:
} 
}  declare +m
} 1:Differences of declare and typeset
} ?(eval):1: bad option: -m
} 
} I noticed the missing `m' in the list of declare options when checking
} the completion function was consistent with the code. I assumed that
} was an oversight.

At the very top of that Test/B02typeset.ztst there is:

# Equivalences:
#  declare   typeset                 but declare does not accept -m
(etc.)

"cvs annotate" says I committed the firet-ever revision of this, which
included that test, but I'm afraid I don't remember why "declare" does
not support -m unless it's "just in case" bash's declare later starts
taking a -m option and we wanted to reserve it for future compatibility.