From: "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>
To: наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Cc: Seth McDonald <sethmcmail@pm.me>,
Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>,
linux-man@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/2] src/bin/sman: Add script
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 16:31:51 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260128223151.tkp6urusx7wtrpyo@illithid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tl5pjzy56c5f4ce5smzbvjlbiblld6vjhrcg3u5ahmcvphgnur@tarta.nabijaczleweli.xyz>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1062 bytes --]
At 2026-01-28T23:02:24+0100, наб wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 01:07:30PM -0600, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > B) (While the foregoing discusses GNU Bash specifically, I have
> > read--but not seen a proof, and can't promise that I'd understand
> > a proof if I saw one--that POSIX shell is undecidable as well,
> > the "alias" feature being a sufficient condition to produce
> > thus.)
>
> If, AIUI, "undecidable" in this case means "the parser depends on the
> execution of the program being parsed", then alias is sufficient do
> ensure this property, but I think it's the only feature that lets you
> inject macros into the parser, or otherwise interact with it directly
> like this.
That sounds plausible to me, and consistent with my occasional,
undisciplined, and inadequate research on the topic.
Shall we organize a movement to get "alias" taken out of POSIX
202y/203x? I don't care if implementations keep it around, but it sure
seems like a dreadful thing for the standard to _mandate_.
Regards,
Branden
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-28 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-27 9:20 [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] New sman(1) script Seth McDonald
2026-01-27 9:20 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/2] src/bin/sman: Add script Seth McDonald
2026-01-28 16:52 ` наб
2026-01-28 17:19 ` Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-28 19:07 ` G. Branden Robinson
2026-01-28 22:02 ` наб
2026-01-28 22:31 ` G. Branden Robinson [this message]
2026-01-27 9:20 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] man/man1/sman.1: Add man page Seth McDonald
2026-01-27 13:47 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] New sman(1) script Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-28 4:44 ` Seth McDonald
2026-01-28 5:48 ` G. Branden Robinson
2026-01-28 14:36 ` Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-28 14:47 ` Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-28 18:55 ` [PATCH v2] src/bin/mansectf, man/man1/mansectf.1: Add program and manual page Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-29 5:50 ` Seth McDonald
2026-01-29 11:27 ` Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-29 14:31 ` New PARAMETERS section in manual pages (was: [PATCH v2] src/bin/mansectf, man/man1/mansectf.1: Add program and manual page) Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-29 20:24 ` G. Branden Robinson
2026-01-29 22:06 ` Alejandro Colomar
2026-01-29 22:20 ` G. Branden Robinson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260128223151.tkp6urusx7wtrpyo@illithid \
--to=g.branden.robinson@gmail.com \
--cc=alx@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz \
--cc=sethmcmail@pm.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox