Re: process substitution bug with set -e?

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 14,  5:28pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} These interactions between different features are definitely not clearly
} documented.  This formally quadratic problem  --- it's not actually as bad
} as (features)**2, of course --- is still fairly horrific in the case of
} zsh.

I'd argue that it's actually worse than (features)**2, because you have to
determine not only whether feature X interacts with feature Y, but whether
the interaction of X with Y futher interacts with feature Z.  E.g. just for
this thread we had ERR_EXIT, MONITOR, and process substitution involved.

So we've pretty much decided on a case-by-case basis what to document and
what not to, but in this instance we've done enough legwork that it is
probably worth writing it down.