Re: Docs fix

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 26,  7:25pm, Zoltan Hidvegi wrote:
> Subject: Re: Docs fix
> > > The first one is just some stuff for the FAQ about $* vs "$@"
> > 
> > The FAQ was correct without this patch.  $* and "$@" are equivalent in
> > zsh, unless you run it under Bourne sh or ksh emulation (i.e. with the
> > SH_WORD_SPLIT option set).
> 
> Not exactly.  "$@" keeps empty arguments and independent of option and
> IFS settings, neither of which is true for $*.

Yes, but as I was just explaining privately to Phil, the context of his
change is "what zsh construct is most like using \!* in csh aliases?"

The best answer is $*, because you have to use \!*:q to get "$@" behavior
in csh.  An argument could be made that $==* is even better, but not "$@".