Re: [Test Breakage 2.46.0-rc0] Test t0021.35 fails on NonStop

> Subject: doc: guide to use of "local" shell language construct
>
> The scripted Porcelain commands do not allow use of "local" because
> it is not universally supported, but we use it liberally in our test
> scripts, which means some POSIX compliant shells (like "ksh93") can
> not be used to run our tests.
>
> Document the status quo, and hint that we might want to change the
> situation in the fiture.

> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> ---
> diff --git c/Documentation/CodingGuidelines w/Documentation/CodingGuidelines
> @@ -186,7 +186,9 @@ For shell scripts specifically (not exhaustive):
>   - Even though "local" is not part of POSIX, we make heavy use of it
>     in our test suite.  We do not use it in scripted Porcelains, and
>     hopefully nobody starts using "local" before they are reimplemented
> -   in C ;-)
> +   in C ;-) Notably, ksh (not just reimplementations but the real one
> +   from AT&T Research) does not support "local" and cannot be used,
> +   which we might want to reconsider.

> diff --git c/t/README w/t/README
> @@ -850,6 +850,14 @@ And here are the "don'ts:"
> + - Don't overuse "local"
> +
> +   Because strictly POSIX-compliant shells do not have to support
> +   "local", we avoid using it in our scripted Porcelain scripts, but
> +   we have allowed use of "local" in test scripts.  We may want to
> +   reconsider this and rewrite our tests to also run on shells like
> +   ksh93.  Do not add new use of "local" unnecessarily.