Zsh Mailing List Archive Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: All the way up or current scope

X-seq: zsh-workers 53572
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Philippe Altherr <philippe.altherr@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: All the way up or current scope
Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 09:19:21 -0700
Archived-at: <https://zsh.org/workers/53572>
In-reply-to: <CAGdYchv84+isv2Y5B+WJtfz7cGtX-L7br+ZUgqshZC2Tc1OoOA@mail.gmail.com>
List-id: <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
References: <CAGdYchv84+isv2Y5B+WJtfz7cGtX-L7br+ZUgqshZC2Tc1OoOA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 7:19 AM Philippe Altherr
<philippe.altherr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> When a function is exited and the scope of named reference is updated because it referred to a local variable of the exited function, should its scope be set to the (new) current scope (i.e., the scope of the calling function) or should it be set all the way up to the scope of the next enclosing rname variable or the global scope if no such variable exists?

I'll be AFK most of today and don't have time to confirm right now,
but I'm reasonably sure that "all the way to the top" violates the
"works like ksh" condition.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: All the way up or current scope
  - From: Philippe Altherr

References:
- All the way up or current scope
  - From: Philippe Altherr

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author