Re: path PATH

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2023-01-21 13:52, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> Why do you keep harping on this, despite everything we've said?
> Again, the fact that your shell only has one variable that "typeset
> -p" displays this way is incidental; you could create more any time
> you want.

I quite understand.  It is unique HERE, and that's what lead me to think 
it was in a category all it's own.  I was wrong.  I get it now.


Roman:

> When you need to see a specific representation, you
should not use `typeset -p` and instead arrange for your preferred
representation to be produced explicitly.

Exactly.  But as I said, I want to display the types too, and had hoped it would be possible, but it isn't so that's that.  But now that I know exactly how the scalar is created and what it must look like, the problem becomes trivial -- replace spaces with colons.  My big error was thinking the tied names were just basically aliases for exactly the same array so PATH path *seemed* like a special case. Dunno, it was just a post-mortem on where I went astray. I've wasted enough of your time on this.