From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:45:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] t1404: document function test_update_rejected
Message-ID: <57598F2F.9050806@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5756FCF3.7050509@kdbg.org>

On 06/07/2016 06:57 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 07.06.2016 um 13:50 schrieb Michael Haggerty:
>>   test_update_rejected () {
>> +    local prefix before pack create error &&
> 
> Do we want to add more of unportable 'local' declarations?

Sorry, I forgot that `local` is not in the POSIX standard.

According to [1] it's nevertheless very portable. Do you object to
`local` based only on its absence from POSIX, or because it's known to
cause problems in the real world? I ask because it is a convenient
feature (and its lack is a common cause of mysterious errors), so it
would be nice if we could allow its use.

Michael

[1] http://apenwarr.ca/log/?m=201102#28