Re: 'r' history parameter documentation fix

[Štěpán Němec <stepnem@xxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Stephenson wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 14:27:24 +0200
> Štěpán Němec <stepnem@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> the "for this purpose" thing made me wonder "Hm, is this supposed to
>> imply that Zsh also might have other notions of file extensions in
>> other contexts?"
>
> I'll remove "for this purpose".

Thanks. :-)

>> Everybody knows what a file extension is, right?)
>
> I think it's worth being explicit.  For example, it's probably obvious
> to a geek that alongfilename.withalongbitontheend has a file extension,
> but a casual shell user might say "surely that's too long to be an
> extension?  aren't they limited to three characters, or something?",
> or they might not realise "manpage.3" had an extension ("surely they've
> got to be alphabetic, or something"?) and it's not necessarily clear
> whether "foo." has an extension "." or no extension.  Etcetera.

Fair enough, I guess.

-- 
Štěpán