Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

when read fails due to exceeding FISH_READ_BYTE_LIMIT should the var be defined? #4180

Closed
krader1961 opened this issue Jul 3, 2017 · 0 comments
Closed

when read fails due to exceeding FISH_READ_BYTE_LIMIT should the var be defined? #4180

krader1961 opened this issue Jul 3, 2017 · 0 comments
Assignees
@krader1961
Labels
bug Something that's not working as intended
Milestone
fish 2.7.0

Comments

@krader1961
Copy link
Contributor

While working on making our unit tests compatible with issue #4163 I noticed that read x does not define x if the read fails because too much data was read. This wasn't noticed by the unit tests because they relied on string length "$x" to report zero if the var is empty or undefined. It seems to me the var should be defined but with no elements, not even a single empty string, when the read fails in this manner.

Does anyone have a different opinion?
@krader1961 krader1961 added the bug Something that's not working as intended label Jul 3, 2017
@krader1961 krader1961 added this to the fish 2.7.0 milestone Jul 3, 2017
@krader1961 krader1961 self-assigned this Jul 3, 2017
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 17, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees

@krader1961 krader1961

Labels
bug Something that's not working as intended
Projects
None yet
Milestone
fish 2.7.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@krader1961