From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23960 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2016 06:39:06 -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: 21981 Received: (qmail 18123 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2016 06:39:06 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-pf0-f170.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(209.85.192.170):SA:0(0.0/5.0):. Processed in 0.793724 secs); 28 Sep 2016 06:39:06 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: schaefer@brasslantern.com X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at brasslantern.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brasslantern-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments:references:to:subject :mime-version; bh=R8tDx40sotSMIk22ziQfon5PSqiRc6UHZMyhtKYKZ2g=; b=N2FC0AhRE/TCGvEpSK+BLPm5xProKPigEXlgMZaVR4Lb1+WNP8su5ltk6/E7IPboqj 2uihQMIY0foUbQ7mzIvfGQtds3kuDg07BnyOe4IJCiUFw+8Gl/LUeW5AP9LidjQiPHnh dE7yq6qC9X6v6H8NnOUQnHEjpZFaoz8uTIPmQAmj6nVXwQqvAQQ9nuaSaTDVH83YfLgH 0pDiEfJLgjO5Vjl15028GK2XLtXqVoLD1XFLjBYy3zAQsWH1NSL3D/7l97T5SarU3QN2 i9LbfX8cC6dPTy7WAumlmYE7Q/OAP2tcwf5wJLCQCvGBoUb6FmY7xvWIfqKg0vpj10Md z4WA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments :references:to:subject:mime-version; bh=R8tDx40sotSMIk22ziQfon5PSqiRc6UHZMyhtKYKZ2g=; b=IvtPd+uqLYaJXD30akPXtvryA0Os3r66QjH6rWo0HhEDXtb56ThGGfrmkgf1mWr66m nclOHC+m4mYSJ65UuYcpXf0HeHXWUQs4e+NOUtZi/JWqpqzAhmCNUUDwFSlBE+FjeVxq JypNjFaKfh3jtdx9yrKo62C2SaZ4qLdXCuvSmXzeTXfSqndXqJGk2wRju+38fbWwV2YY alF468iS7TUoasQwRMYEWAHGx/YjO5T+wvNIe+efJq4EKN3rd5UHY7G8QFbA28oTGO/a Okk/HBofsR3kQEWBtMnS66hbDZa8SwlKjprrzmH2wp1zlckwAkrhDRiSranJisIKd3kb avCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwN/SDGt2dfNS2sknnLSs09aqE99cVco6GIIDr4mhPuo/ZYRJWi/j0OOey9FvtowDg== X-Received: by 10.98.73.202 with SMTP id r71mr54472069pfi.36.1475044740406; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 23:39:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <160927233915.ZM29612@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 23:39:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: Comments: In reply to Sebastian Gniazdowski "Special _tags:comptags:67: no tags registered" (Sep 27, 6:40pm) References: X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: Zsh Users Subject: Re: Special _tags:comptags:67: no tags registered MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sep 27, 6:40pm, Sebastian Gniazdowski wrote: } } I've tried debug-printing whole _tags to see differences in path the } execution has taken or in parameters, and it was rather the same, } couldn't spot any differences. I wonder what is the origin of such } error message? Remember that "declare -f" for autoloaded functions will dump out a definition of the form "_name() { builtin autoload -X }". There are subtle differences between "real" autoloading and autoload -X. In this case, the internals of "comptags" use the depth of the function call stack to keep track of which tags are active at which nested loop, but the addition of the "autoload -X" wrapper changes the call depth.