Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 21:29:29 +0200 From: Stefan Farfeleder <stefan@fafoe.narf.at> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: $LINENO within functions Message-ID: <20080530192929.GB1056@lizard.fafoe.narf.at> In-Reply-To: <20080530181529.GD21317@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20080530172711.GA1056@lizard.fafoe.narf.at> <20080530181242.GC21317@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20080530181529.GD21317@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 09:15:29PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 09:12:42PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 07:27:12PM +0200, Stefan Farfeleder wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > SUSv3 says the following about $LINENO:
> > >
> > > "Set by the shell to a decimal number representing the current
> > > sequential line number (numbered starting with 1) within a script or
> > > function before it executes each command. If the user unsets or resets
> > > LINENO , the variable may lose its special meaning for the life of the
> > > shell. If the shell is not currently executing a script or function, the
> > > value of LINENO is unspecified. This volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001
> > > specifies the effects of the variable only for systems supporting the
> > > User Portability Utilities option."
> > >
> > > My initial interpretation of "or function" was that it means $LINENO
> > > within a function should be relative to the function's beginning line.
> > > Now I'm not so sure anymore. Bash release 2.05b changed the expansion
> > > of $LINENO within functions to absolute numbering, stating this is
> > > required by POSIX. But then I wonder about the meaning of "or
> > > function". Does it mean functions in interactive scripts? Because for
> > > functions in shell scripts the mentioning of both "script" and
> > > "function" seems redundant.
> >
> > I do not know whether you need this data, but ksh93 and pdksh exhibit
> > the same behaviour as bash. For the rev. 1.1 of lineno.0, I got
> >
> > 2
> > 3
> > 6
> > 7
> > 12
> > 13
> > foo
> > foo
> > 2
> >
> > On the other hand, zsh produces
> >
> > 2
> > 3
> > 1
> > 2
> > 12
> > 13
> > foo
> > foo
> > 2
>
> Oh, and /usr/xpg4/bin/sh on the fully patches Solaris 10 output is identical
> with the zsh one.
Yes, the current implementation has a +1 offset compared to zsh. The
reason is that $LINENO can occur on the same line as the function name
itself (ie. zsh prints 0 for 'f() { echo $LINENO }' which contradicts
the specification).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080530192929.GB1056>