Re: [BUG] Issue with set built-in in 5.8 (?)

[Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 14:01 -0600, dana wrote:
> On 17 Feb 2020, at 03:02, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > - Regardless of what we choose, the other behaviour is achievable: if
> >   we make the error fatal people can use «eval» to make it non-fatal,
> >   and if we make the error non-fatal people can use «… || exit 1» to
> >   make it fatal.
> Of the two, the latter seems more intuitive

I would say so, too.  We don't have *that* many fatal errors for settings,
I don't think.

Tracing through POSIX to get an exact answer can be a bit of a pain;
some wording somewhere implies some particular case at another
point not explicitly cross-referenced etc. etc.

pws