From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-users-return-18029-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 15311 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2013 16:29:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Users List <zsh-users.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-users@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-users-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 18029
Received: (qmail 20497 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2013 16:28:58 -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=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,
	SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-b7ef66d00000795a-93-525c1bc77576
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 17:28:54 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: zsh-users@zsh.org
Subject: Re: process substitution bug with set -e?
Message-id: <20131014172854.70e2c3ce@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <20131014150845.GB31070@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr>
References: <20131014124126.GA31070@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr>
 <20131014144838.6ec034dd@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <20131014150845.GB31070@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr>
Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker:
 H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFuphluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/4Nd3j0jFBBnPfaVjsOLmS0YHRY9XB
	D0wBjFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGecaTrAXPGerWDZzIWMD4wLWLkZODgkBE4lZ56ZB2WISF+6t
	Z+ti5OIQEljKKPGpeSUzlMMk8XDvSUaQKhYBVYlfLxaBdbAJGEpM3TQbLC4iICqxfMVmdhBb
	WMBI4uOnLjCbV8BeYsPDp0D1HBycAlYSM9uZQMJCAvMZJSae0Qex+QX0Ja7+/cQEcYS9xMwr
	ZxghWgUlfky+xwJiMwtoSWze1sQKYctLbF7zlnkCo8AsJGWzkJTNQlK2gJF5FaNoamlyQXFS
	eq6RXnFibnFpXrpecn7uJkZICH7dwbj0mNUhRgEORiUe3gCBmCAh1sSy4srcQ4wSHMxKIry5
	b6ODhHhTEiurUovy44tKc1KLDzEycXBKNTAmBhhX3VX31NH9pP79WBBD6fSXWnXB4qu4frtn
	dEVtNZ5T7f96/ew0KeeWC1ctNxwPkmnW3sb689fljrvdzZeSjk2UDWfiOW510P6a4M3PfjG+
	HyoONAhPaC71eRXPZcqXIvD+eKvOqZ6zqhNMlGJemdTO1Z1jNLOHl2Xb76TWm8d+iy2VP6LE
	UpyRaKjFXFScCADSITvSHwIAAA==

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 17:08:45 +0200
Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> wrote:
> I can see that it has the same behavior as, for instance:
> 
>   { echo foo; exit } >>(sleep 1; cat -n)
> 
> Again, one may wonder whether the shell should exit immediately.
> Is this clearly documented somewhere?

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 note that with a subshell, in

  ( echo foo ) >>(sleep 10; cat -n)

the shell waits but in

  ( echo foo; exit ) >>(sleep 10; cat -n)

it doesn't.  So this must mean the logic for waiting is inside the
subshell.  This surprised me.  I don't know if this has implications for
what's going on in the case of { ... }.

pws