From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2531 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2004 17:59:27 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 17:59:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 14459 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2004 17:59:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7150 Received: (qmail 14444 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2004 17:59:06 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 17:59:06 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [66.93.131.57] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 17:59:5 -0000 Received: from lorien.emufarm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lorien.emufarm.org (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i2BHwv1t005846; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:58:57 -0800 Received: (from duvall@localhost) by lorien.emufarm.org (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id i2BHwvZW005845; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:58:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:58:56 -0800 From: Danek Duvall To: Bart Schaefer Cc: zsh-users@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: $_ and compatibility Message-ID: <20040311175856.GA5768@lorien.emufarm.org> Mail-Followup-To: Danek Duvall , Bart Schaefer , zsh-users@sunsite.dk References: <65a050lf2u4bjch4u2uv68q56u5co0gknp@4ax.com> <20040311091003.GD844@mail.guild.uwa.edu.au> <4im0509toihq2ef1vlnnid6t93j90f6gor@4ax.com> <15272.1079008435@csr.com> <39n050dv0evle58451ugj2m1vfktsj1e1b@4ax.com> <20040311125558.GA24218@picard.franken.de> <1040311171735.ZM20352@candle.brasslantern.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1040311171735.ZM20352@candle.brasslantern.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 05:17:35PM +0000, Bart Schaefer wrote: > I'm usually a stickler for backwards compatibility, but does anyone > think anything would break if the changing of $_ were delayed until > after shell functions have been called, so that it would remain the > last word of the _previous_ command? Somewhere, someone would break. That's almost a given. But with a proper notice, maybe it would be okay? I think it would make sense to keep a list of (non-bug) incompatibilities somewhere in the distribution so that people would have a definitive place to find out why their stuff isn't working anymore. But it still makes it harder to incorporate zsh in a distribution that strives for backwards compatibility. :( Danek