On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 05:57:40PM +0100, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> Passing through the flag saying if this is the last chunk of code in the
> list being executed by the function and its parents is the most obvious
> necessary test, but I think most of the infrastructure for this already
> exists.  For example, if you run
> 
> { :; sleep 20; } &
> 
> you should find there's no additional shell instance when the sleep
> is running (up to shell state that might get in the way --- I get an
> extra shell when running from the top-level shell in the window but not
> if I start a new one, for reasons that escape me completely).

I found this statement very weird, and dug through the code for a couple hours
myself; sadly, without any luck figuring out why, either.

Definitely the strangest part of this entire thread so far for me.

-- 
Cheers,
Joey Pabalinas