why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

[Sweth Chandramouli]

	to what does the "bare" in bare_glob_qual refer?  as
far as i can tell, if bare_glob_qual is set, filename generation
will accept qlob qualifiers, and if it is not set, it will treat
text inside parens in a glob as part of the glob itself; there is,
however, no way that i know of to unset bare_glob_qual and then
use glob qualifiers in some "un-bare" way.  is there?

	-- sweth.

-- 
Sweth Chandramouli
IS Coordinator, The George Washington University
<sweth@gwu.edu> / (202) 994 - 8521 (V) / (202) 994 - 0458 (F)
<a href="http://astaroth.nit.gwu.edu/~sweth/disc.html">*</a>

Re: why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

[Bart Schaefer]

Sweth Chandramouli writes:
 > 	to what does the "bare" in bare_glob_qual refer?

See zsh_users/1569:

   My intention is that eventually we will have some other, unambiguous,
   glob qualifier syntax, which will be available regardless of
   BARE_GLOB_QUAL.  (We need the capability to disable the current
   qualifier syntax in order to fully emulate ksh glob syntax.)

   -zefram

So "bare" means that they're just sitting there on the end of the pattern,
with no special disambiguating syntax to introduce them.

Re: why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

[Sweth Chandramouli]

On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 10:40:49PM -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Sweth Chandramouli writes:
>  > 	to what does the "bare" in bare_glob_qual refer?
> 
> See zsh_users/1569:
> 
>    My intention is that eventually we will have some other, unambiguous,
>    glob qualifier syntax, which will be available regardless of
>    BARE_GLOB_QUAL.  (We need the capability to disable the current
>    qualifier syntax in order to fully emulate ksh glob syntax.)
> 
>    -zefram
> 
> So "bare" means that they're just sitting there on the end of the pattern,
> with no special disambiguating syntax to introduce them.

	but, as of yet at least, there is no non-bare syntax?  that is,
if bare_glob_qual is turned off, can glob qualifiers still somehow be
used?

	-- sweth.

-- 
Sweth Chandramouli
IS Coordinator, The George Washington University
<sweth@gwu.edu> / (202) 994 - 8521 (V) / (202) 994 - 0458 (F)
<a href="http://astaroth.nit.gwu.edu/~sweth/disc.html">*</a>

Re: why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

[Andrew Main]

Sweth Chandramouli wrote:
>	but, as of yet at least, there is no non-bare syntax?

Correct.

>	                                                       that is,
>if bare_glob_qual is turned off, can glob qualifiers still somehow be
>used?

No.

-zefram

RE: why is `bare' in bare_glob_qual?

[Andrej Borsenkow]

> 
> -zefram

Zefram! Are you really back again?

/andrej