GNU bug report logs - #21477
24.4; Imenu - improper parse of shell function names

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Matthew Persico <mpersico5 <at> bloomberg.net>

Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:29:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Merged with 52319, 52928, 54265, 56003, 57255, 58554

Found in version 24.4

Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #34 received at 21477 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Matthew Persico (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A)" <mpersico5 <at> bloomberg.net>
To: schwab <at> linux-m68k.org,
    stefan <at> marxist.se
Cc: 21477 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21477: 24.4; Imenu - improper parse of shell function names
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 18:13:19 -0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
I am not sure what is going on here, but I just loaded up this file and it parsed just fine.

Now, I KNOW that this didn't work when I reported it. And Stefan was able to reproduce it.

I wonder if Stefan can still reproduce?

Since I can't reproduce, I have no issue with closing. If it regresses, I'll open a new issue, making a note of the versions of various packages, which would certainly help diagnosis.

Stefan, it's been a while - can you send me a link to my original bug report?


From: stefan <at> marxist.se At: 08/12/20 12:00:09To:  Matthew Persico (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A ) ,  schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
Cc:  21477 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21477: 24.4; Imenu - improper parse of shell function names

Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> linux-m68k.org> writes:

> It's a POSIX extension, enforced in POSIX mode:
>
>   13. Function names must be valid shell 'name's.  That is, they may not
>      contain characters other than letters, digits, and underscores, and
>      may not start with a digit.  Declaring a function with an invalid
>      name causes a fatal syntax error in non-interactive shells.

Right.  Well, then adding syntax highlighting here would in a way
encourage people to write non-POSIX conformant shell code, which even if
it happens to work in Bash sounds like a bad idea.

So I'm leaning towards closing this bug report as wontfix.

Any other opinions?

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas


[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 224 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.