Re: PATH: autoload with explicit path

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Dec 12,  4:31pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} We're at the point where autoload isn't really a synonym of functions -u
} any more.  I'd be tempted to document "functions -u" as "implements a
} limited subset of..." rather than "equivalent to...".  (Does anyone use
} that interface except for compatibility?)

There's
  autoload
  functions -u
  typeset -f -u

but there are aready some variations of each that are not supported by
the others, so which ones say they are "equivalent to" which others is
probably overdue for an overhaul.

For example I don't think there's any way to autoload a math function in
a single command -- you have to autoload it and then mark it as math, or
something like that.