From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-users-return-3850-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.dk>
Received: (qmail 5736 invoked from network); 2 May 2001 22:58:18 -0000
Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 2 May 2001 22:58:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 3183 invoked by alias); 2 May 2001 22:58:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 3850
Received: (qmail 3170 invoked from network); 2 May 2001 22:58:06 -0000
From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@candle.brasslantern.com>
Message-Id: <010502155651.ZM16427@candle.brasslantern.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 15:56:51 -0700
In-Reply-To: <87u2339yla.fsf@cenderis.demon.co.uk>
Comments: In reply to Bruce Stephens <bruce@cenderis.demon.co.uk>
        "Re: do I win the "most pointless use of ZSH" award? ;)" (May  2, 11:26pm)
References: <20010427213108.A28356@idiocy.org> 
	<20010430124125.A2527@pianosa.catch22.org> 
	<20010430210517.A4840@idiocy.org> 
	<010430151553.ZM9588@candle.brasslantern.com> 
	<87u2339yla.fsf@cenderis.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail Lite (5.0.0 30July97)
To: Bruce Stephens <bruce@cenderis.demon.co.uk>, zsh-users@sunsite.dk
Subject: Re: do I win the "most pointless use of ZSH" award? ;)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On May 2, 11:26pm, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> Subject: Re: do I win the "most pointless use of ZSH" award? ;)
> "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@candle.brasslantern.com> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > 	for (( p=0.0, q=0.0, i=0 ; p*p+q*q < 4 && i < 32 ; i++));do
> 
> I couldn't get this to work for a while.  It turned out one of my
> initialization scripts was setting i to an absolute pathname:

Alan's code was intended to be run as a script, not as a shell function.
To make a shell function of it, you should add:

	local lines columns colour a b p q i pnew

at the top.

>         zsh% i=/foo; for ((i=0; i<10; i++)) echo $i
>         zsh: bad math expression: operand expected at `/foo'
> 
> Is this a bug or a feature that I'm entirely missing?

It's a feature.  The value of any parameter that appears in math context
is evaluated as an expression (up to a maximum recursion depth, I forget
what just now).  So

	i=foo/bar
	((i))

is the same as

	((foo/bar))

and so on for the values of `foo' and `bar'.