Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Strange behavior creating functions
- X-seq: zsh-workers 9493
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Strange behavior creating functions
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:39:30 +0000
- In-reply-to: <200001310949.KAA29090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <200001310949.KAA29090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Jan 31, 10:49am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
} Subject: Re: Strange behavior creating functions
}
}
} Bart Schaefer wrote:
}
} > I wanted to create a function with a unique name, so I tried this:
} >
} > function foo$$ () { echo $0 }
}
} Urgh. Names in function definitions should be expanded.
This seems like the sort of thing that should have a regression test in
the Test directory -- because otherwise no one will remember about it,
and it was pure accident that I found it at all.
I'm sure we can find other function definition tests to try.
--- /dev/null Tue May 5 13:32:27 1998
+++ Test/09funcdef.ztst Mon Jan 31 03:32:58 2000
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+%test
+
+ function f$$ () {
+ print regress expansion of function names
+ }
+ f$$
+0:Regression test: `function f$$ () { ... }'
+>regress expansion of function names
--
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author