environment stuff.

environment stuff.

[Ray Andrews]

When you do a complete dump of the environment, there's this
ginormous thing that starts:

    typeset -A _comps
    _comps=(- _precommand -array-value- _value -assign-parameter-
    _assign -brace-parameter- _brace_parameter -command- _autocd
    -command-line- _normal -condition- _condition -default- _default ...

... and ends:

      _zstyle ztodo _ztodo zxpdf _xpdf zypper _zypper )

What on Earth is it? Where does stuff like that get set?

Re: environment stuff.

[Bart Schaefer]

On Nov 26,  5:23pm, Ray Andrews wrote:
}
} When you do a complete dump of the environment, there's this

Let me point out that if you get any "typeset -A ..." then you're NOT
doing a complete dump of the environment.  You're doing a complete dump
of the internal parameter space.  Some things get copied back and forth
from the internal parameter space to the environment, and you can use
parameter references to examine the environment, but the two are not
the same.  The environment is the exported subset of the parameter
space, and you can't export arrays, especially associative ones.

} ginormous thing that starts:
} 
}     typeset -A _comps
} 
} What on Earth is it? Where does stuff like that get set?

That's the list of all command names mapped to functions that implement
the completions for them.  It's populated by compinit.

Re: environment stuff.

[Ray Andrews]

On 11/26/2014 06:03 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Nov 26,  5:23pm, Ray Andrews wrote:
> }
> } When you do a complete dump of the environment, there's this
>
> Let me point out that if you get any "typeset -A ..." then you're NOT
> doing a complete dump of the environment.  You're doing a complete dump
> of the internal parameter space.  Some things get copied back and forth
> from the internal parameter space to the environment, and you can use
> parameter references to examine the environment, but the two are not
> the same.  The environment is the exported subset of the parameter
> space, and you can't export arrays, especially associative ones.
Good to know.  I trust this parameter space is off limits and I don't have
to know anything more about it for now?
> } ginormous thing that starts:
> }
> }     typeset -A _comps
> }
> } What on Earth is it? Where does stuff like that get set?
>
> That's the list of all command names mapped to functions that implement
> the completions for them.  It's populated by compinit.
Such a load of work!

Re: environment stuff.

[Bart Schaefer]

On Nov 26,  6:25pm, Ray Andrews wrote:
}
} I trust this parameter space is off limits and I don't have
} to know anything more about it for now?

Er, not exactly.  Shell scripts refer to parameters all the time.
$1, $2, $*, $@ are all parameters (the "positional" parameters);
parameters with names are variables, like $path, $PS1, and $REPLY;
exported variables are the environment, and at startup time the
environment is [mostly] implicitly imported into variables that
are automatically marked as exported.

Then there are various types of parameters (scalars, arrays, and
associative arrays AKA hashes) and subtypes (integer and float are
scalars, but most scalars are not integer or float).

So you do need to know about what parameters are, but there are a
lot of them whose purpose you might not need to understand if you
aren't directly manipulating a particular shell feature.

Re: environment stuff.

[Ray Andrews]

On 11/26/2014 07:45 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> So you do need to know about what parameters are, but there are a
> lot of them whose purpose you might not need to understand if you
> aren't directly manipulating a particular shell feature.
>
I know I need to know what parameters *are*, I mean I don't need to
worry about that giant list of them ;-) ... or, is there something I'd
need to look at via: " typeset -p "? It looks pretty arcane, most of it.
But it looks like you're planning to hide some of that stuff anyway.

Re: environment stuff.

[Bart Schaefer]

On Nov 27,  2:14pm, Ray Andrews wrote:
}
} I know I need to know what parameters *are*, I mean I don't need to
} worry about that giant list of them ;-) ... or, is there something I'd
} need to look at via: " typeset -p "?

I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ... it's mostly for
dumping state in a "source"-reloadable way.

Re: environment stuff.

[Roman Neuhauser]

# schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-27 15:05:14 -0800:
> I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ...

i do, quite often.

-- 
roman

Re: environment stuff.

[Ray Andrews]

On 11/28/2014 01:58 PM, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> # schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-27 15:05:14 -0800:
>> I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ...
> i do, quite often.
Interesting.  What do you find  in there Roman?

Re: environment stuff.

[Roman Neuhauser]

# rayandrews@eastlink.ca / 2014-11-28 14:55:47 -0800:
> On 11/28/2014 01:58 PM, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > # schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-27 15:05:14 -0800:
> >> I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ...
> > i do, quite often.
> Interesting.  What do you find  in there Roman?
 
typeset -p prints variables that are in scope, not just exported ones.
i can nest several expansions and inspect the results as i add each
layer.

-- 
roman

Re: environment stuff.

[Ray Andrews]

On 11/29/2014 02:53 AM, Roman Neuhauser wrote:

> typeset -p prints variables that are in scope, not just exported ones. 
> i can nest several expansions and inspect the results as i add each 
> layer. 

Ah, so a sort of global variable viewer.

Re: environment stuff.

[TJ Luoma]

On 29 Nov 2014, at 11:21, Ray Andrews wrote:

> On 11/29/2014 02:53 AM, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
>
>> typeset -p prints variables that are in scope, not just exported 
>> ones. i can nest several expansions and inspect the results as i add 
>> each layer.
>
> Ah, so a sort of global variable viewer.

Curious. This addresses a question that I recently had.

I thought that `printenv` showed a list of all known variables and their 
values, but I recently realized that it was missing a lot of them.


Q » Is `typeset` what I should use for that? Or is there a better way?


For example, I have sometimes used `printenv > all-vars.txt` to get a 
'snapshot' of current variables. Seems like `typeset > all-vars.txt` is 
much better. I just compared them and `typeset` shows 291 vs `printenv` 
showing 110.

TjL

Re: environment stuff.

[Lawrence Velázquez]

On Nov 29, 2014, at 10:59 PM, TJ Luoma <luomat@gmail.com> wrote:

> I thought that `printenv` showed a list of all known variables and their values, but I recently realized that it was missing a lot of them.
> 
> 
> Q » Is `typeset` what I should use for that? Or is there a better way?
> 
> 
> For example, I have sometimes used `printenv > all-vars.txt` to get a 'snapshot' of current variables. Seems like `typeset > all-vars.txt` is much better. I just compared them and `typeset` shows 291 vs `printenv` showing 110.

Not all zsh parameters are exported to the environment. `printenv` only prints those parameters that have been exported. `typeset` prints *all* parameters.

vq

Re: environment stuff.

[Bart Schaefer]

On Nov 28, 10:58pm, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
} Subject: Re: environment stuff.
}
} # schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-27 15:05:14 -0800:
} > I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ...
} 
} i do, quite often.

The entire dump?  Or for specific variable names or patterns?

The latter would not surprise me.

Re: environment stuff.

[Roman Neuhauser]

# schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-28 15:37:46 -0800:
> On Nov 28, 10:58pm, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> } Subject: Re: environment stuff.
> }
> } # schaefer@brasslantern.com / 2014-11-27 15:05:14 -0800:
> } > I don't think anyone ever LOOKS at "typeset -p" ...
> } 
> } i do, quite often.
> 
> The entire dump?  Or for specific variable names or patterns?
> 
> The latter would not surprise me.

yeah, mostly the latter, though i tend to overuse | grep ... ;)

-- 
roman