From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10652 invoked by alias); 30 Dec 2017 10:23:05 -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: List-Unsubscribe: X-Seq: 23032 Received: (qmail 4723 invoked by uid 1010); 30 Dec 2017 10:23:05 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from smtprelay03.ispgateway.de 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(80.67.31.37):SA:0(-2.6/5.0):. Processed in 2.689104 secs); 30 Dec 2017 10:23:05 -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=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: ft@bewatermyfriend.org X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | From: Frank Terbeck To: mathieu stumpf guntz Cc: Zsh Users Subject: Re: Can zsh `else` reserved keyword command be aliased and the lexem itself be repurposed as `fi` keyword command? In-Reply-To: <3326ffbc-e1ef-cb5a-124c-6597c50cd053@culture-libre.org> (mathieu stumpf guntz's message of "Sat, 30 Dec 2017 10:50:37 +0100") References: <71ef7896-39f8-66fe-f8f8-c7c81b11e2ce@culture-libre.org> <918acbfa-b637-1d13-816b-c6edee0afa5c@culture-libre.org> <81beaeae-6507-c961-b6fd-5831ba58e045@eastlink.ca> <3326ffbc-e1ef-cb5a-124c-6597c50cd053@culture-libre.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 11:05:04 +0100 Message-ID: <87incoh6pb.fsf@ft.bewatermyfriend.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Df-Sender: NDMwNDQ0 Hi. mathieu stumpf guntz wrote: > Le 30/12/2017 =C3=A0 02:07, Bart Schaefer a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: [...] >> Not-so-incidentally, the fact that zsh does NOT do this is one of the >> primary reasons that zsh exists at all. Paul Falstad found it >> distasteful that csh DOES that, and set out to create a shell that had >> the interactive advantages of csh while preserving the separation of >> parse and execution as found in sh and ksh. > > I was, of course, completely unaware of that. I would be interested with = more > technical details if you could provide me some links. There's a fairly well known explanation of this, which can be found if you look for "CSH Programming Considered Harmful". It's archived in multiple places, for example here: http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/csh It discusses a lot of csh deficiencies, its ad-hoc parser being one of them. Regards, Frank --=20 In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. -- RFC 1925