653
functions
(lemmy.ml)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/39334581
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2025
653 points (98.7% liked)
Programmer Humor
27934 readers
1943 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
While
Cfeels fine without having a keyword for function, I feel likebashwould have benefitted from it.Bash (specifically Bash, not POSIX sh) does have a keyword for functions (
function), but it’s optional.Ooh nice.
The optional bit messed it up, because even though I can make my scripts easier for me, other's scripts won't be.
But then
bashhad to be usable withshscripts, so I get it.Right. It’s optional so that Bash remains backwards compatible as a superset of POSIX sh. If you’re working with exclusively Bash, though, it’s nice to use as syntactic sugar if nothing else.