From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 17778 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2022 06:08:42 -0000 Received: from zero.zsh.org (2a02:898:31:0:48:4558:7a:7368) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 13 Sep 2022 06:08:42 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zsh.org; s=rsa-20210803; h=List-Archive:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Id:Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Message-Id: Mime-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=JQhgQBw6uP5pCENw95qLJgp4nterw1NjH4jOUjEsWXM=; b=dKzd+6NpOnPomm3gHFhY1Q5Kz7 lj87oDpFo2pn/VYM+GvzzOSg26gM2FCA/MVILyTVrvZHvQCZuibxokzHHLvx1bayRprt1yQbOk2qs md30u34jPq3+ivgfc8l20gJIlBHhqo0z8hm8F4WE/gvvEZEwSVDnzhm6SLyhB6rQVVocCfvHIiQm7 yIbMRvGJuJBYNEOCRXMYlqpiepNjx67hzfsaTkcnZE0MhdWuUVbFTolQAyN7FiJ+jZtmqS4K1s6Rz Gx6eAvRm5qPMf+vHTif7PuU2ymTIhE4bWDWvcIxnFEsgBD5hFEAKfGHhKN24o3RUUwofY6ODDIGMr E9z+MAwA==; Received: from authenticated user by zero.zsh.org with local id 1oXz69-000DQm-U1; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 06:08:41 +0000 Received: from authenticated user by zero.zsh.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1oXz4n-000ClI-By; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 06:07:17 +0000 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailauth.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B3F27C0054; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap48 ([10.202.2.98]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:07:14 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfedufedguddthecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvfevufgtgf esthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepnfgrfihrvghntggvpgggvghljoiiqhhuvgiiuceo lhgrrhhrhihvseiishhhrdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedttefhveegtedtgf eufedutdehfeejheffffduvdeukefhteffvddthfevgeeggeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhi iigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlrghrrhihvhdomhgvshhmthhprg huthhhphgvrhhsohhnrghlihhthidqudduhedukeejjedtgedqudduledvjeefkeehqdhl rghrrhihvheppeiishhhrdhorhhgsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: iaa214773:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id C5B5E31A0062; Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:07:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-929-g09f3e68182-fm-20220908.004-g09f3e681 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <4844b850-2ca6-4c90-95ae-aae00dc339cf@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:06:17 -0400 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Lawrence_Vel=C3=A1zquez?= To: "Michele Venturi" Cc: zsh-users@zsh.org Subject: Re: Substitute the last match of a pattern during parameters expansion. Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Seq: 28065 Archived-At: X-Loop: zsh-users@zsh.org Errors-To: zsh-users-owner@zsh.org Precedence: list Precedence: bulk Sender: zsh-users-request@zsh.org X-no-archive: yes List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: On Tue, Sep 13, 2022, at 12:19 AM, Michele Venturi wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 08:01, > Lawrence Vel=C3=A1zquez, > , wrote: > >> But there is already a '%' flag... >> This doesn't merits a new one. No, I didn't write that. What I wrote was: "There is already a '%' flag. I do not think this merits a new one." I intentionally said "I do not think" to make it clear that that was my personal opinion. Please do not modify others' words and present the revision as a quotation. It's *extremely* poor form. > What merits a new one then? There isn't a strict policy or anything, but in my opinion new flags should only be considered for broadly useful functionality that cannot be implemented using the existing flags or enhanced versions of them. We already have an absurd number of flags; I don't think new ones should be added willy-nilly. Your use case could theoretically be satisfied by an enhanced 'I' flag, so I don't think it deserves its own flag. > How do you extend the I flag? I don't know. I am not familiar with the code base. --=20 vq