Zsh Mailing List Archive Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file

X-seq: zsh-workers 26041
From: Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>
To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:27:35 +0000
In-reply-to: <20081113151328.GE5114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
References: <20081105212036.GA4698@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081113144212.GB5114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200811131452.mADEqx9i030855@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081113150335.GD5114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081113151328.GE5114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> So, at the moment, zsh is not conformant. The patch I suggested
> seems to fix it but introduces some display glitches.

It's not just in the display, there's a whole extra layer of evaluation
compared with the standard you gave.  A function in zsh is a separate
entity, not a name for another structure.  The zsh-style autoloads
wouldn't work otherwise.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>                  Software Engineer
CSR PLC, Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road
Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070

References:
- f() { ...; } > file
  - From: Stephane Chazelas
- [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file
  - From: Stephane Chazelas
- Re: [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file
  - From: Peter Stephenson
- Re: [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file
  - From: Stephane Chazelas
- Re: [PATCH] Re: f() { ...; } > file
  - From: Stephane Chazelas

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author