Re: [PATCH] Add execute-command() widget function (was Re: [RFC][PATCH] Add change-directory() widget function)

[Marlon Richert <marlon.richert@xxxxxxxxx>]

OK, I give up. Someone else can finish this.

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:25 PM Bart Schaefer
<schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I'm trying not to be a wet blanket here, but:
>
> You've accidentally included the doc for zrestart in the .yo patch.
>
> The -e option is never going to do anything useful, because send-break
> will kill the buffer to which the command has just been written.  (I
> feel as though I've said this before about a different proposed
> widget.  Hm.)  If you wrote to the buffer before calling print -z that
> might make some sense, but more so at PS1 than PS2.
>
> Attempting to pass multiple commands, one per positional argument, and
> then eval them all at once with newlines between, strikes me as
> inviting all kinds of quoting problems, plus obscures the return
> status if some command in the middle of the list fails.
>
> It's not safe to use eval that way to assign to $ops[-v], the argument
> passed to -v might not be a simple variable name.  E.g. if the user
> forgets the variable name, the first command they intended to execute
> will be stored there instead.  Using a single well-known (documented)
> name instead of passing an argument would avoid this, and it's not as
> though you can have two execute-commands simultaneously that would
> introduce a conflict.
>
> Other things that occurred to me not directly related to this patch:
>
> There's nothing preventing the user from passing more "zle" commands
> to execute-commands which could arbitrarily mess up your print -z ...
> heck, execute-commands could even be caused to call itself
> recursively.  This is not something you need to try to code around,
> but it could be documented as a misuse.
>
> Instead of throwing an error when there are no commands provided,
> execute-commands could invoke read-from-minibuffer to input a command
> to run, much like the builtin execute-named-cmd does for widget names.
> That could make execute-commands into a widget rather than just
> something callable from widgets.