From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 148 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2013 17:47:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 18030 Received: (qmail 19673 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2013 17:47:36 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <131014104749.ZM591@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:47:49 -0700 In-reply-to: <20131014172854.70e2c3ce@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: process substitution bug with set -e?" (Oct 14, 5:28pm) References: <20131014124126.GA31070@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr> <20131014144838.6ec034dd@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20131014150845.GB31070@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr> <20131014172854.70e2c3ce@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-users@zsh.org Subject: Re: process substitution bug with set -e? MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Oct 14, 5:28pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } } These interactions between different features are definitely not clearly } documented. This formally quadratic problem --- it's not actually as bad } as (features)**2, of course --- is still fairly horrific in the case of } zsh. I'd argue that it's actually worse than (features)**2, because you have to determine not only whether feature X interacts with feature Y, but whether the interaction of X with Y futher interacts with feature Z. E.g. just for this thread we had ERR_EXIT, MONITOR, and process substitution involved. So we've pretty much decided on a case-by-case basis what to document and what not to, but in this instance we've done enough legwork that it is probably worth writing it down.