I don't really follow these things, so forgive my ignorance if this is well known, but why is it against common sense to keep out bash-isms and keep it POSIX-compliant? That sounds like a pretty good idea to me.
The counter argument would be "but that involves extra work, and it works fine now, with all the bashisms, so why change it for some abstract notion of compliancy"
(Score: 2) by hubie on Saturday November 08 2014, @05:13PM
I don't really follow these things, so forgive my ignorance if this is well known, but why is it against common sense to keep out bash-isms and keep it POSIX-compliant? That sounds like a pretty good idea to me.
(Score: 1) by fritsd on Saturday November 08 2014, @07:38PM
The counter argument would be "but that involves extra work, and it works fine now, with all the bashisms, so why change it for some abstract notion of compliancy"