From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17115 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2000 11:10:45 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Jul 2000 11:10:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 28228 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2000 11:10:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 3260 Received: (qmail 28221 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2000 11:10:24 -0000 Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 12:09:57 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Subject: Re: Probs with nested braces in PROMPT In-reply-to: "Your message of Thu, 06 Jul 2000 14:19:24 +0400." <000801bfe733$a8aef590$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru> To: zsh-users@sunsite.auc.dk (Zsh users list) Message-id: <0FX900MN0WCKBR@la-la.cambridgesiliconradio.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > Yes, of course. But why it did it only when parameter was undefined? I > mean, parsing is done by lexer - and it has to find the closing brace in > any case and lexer does not know (is it true?) about parameter values. > > That is incosistent IMHO and smells more like a bug. No, in that case it got the `%{...%' from inside the braces, then found the (wrong) closing brace, then found the neglected `}' from the parameter expansion, therefore getting the complete expression %{...%}. In this case it didn't matter which brace was which. -- Peter Stephenson Cambridge Silicon Radio, Unit 300, Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 0XL, UK Tel: +44 (0)1223 392070