Asking ZSH: How are you ?

Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Meino Christian Cramer]

Hi,

 what commands I have to give to ZSH to show all "internal" settings?
 Up to now I found unsetopt/setopt/bindkey....

 (by the way: The manual says:

       When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
       `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
       prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
       `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
       default.

  but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
  always gives me (even for setopt +o!):

	   setopt: string expected after -o

 ...no nitpicking...just as an info. May confuse newbies like
 me..... :O)

 Keep zshing!
 Meino

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[DervishD]

    Hi Meino :)

 * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
>        When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
>        `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
>        prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
>        `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
>        default.
> 
>   but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
>   always gives me (even for setopt +o!):
> 
> 	   setopt: string expected after -o

    Of course it does, it's correct ;) You're mixing 'set +o/-o' with
'setopt' and 'unsetopt'. If you want to list all options use
'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
little snippet (for example):

    for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]

    This will give you the list of all option names followed by its
value. I find this easier to understand that the default of prefixing
with 'no' and the like.

    Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

-- 
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Meino Christian Cramer]

From: DervishD <zsh@dervishd.net>
Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 17:17:36 +0200



>     Hi Meino :)

  Hi :))

>  * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
> >        When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
> >        `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
> >        prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
> >        `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
> >        default.
> > 
> >   but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
> >   always gives me (even for setopt +o!):
> > 
> > 	   setopt: string expected after -o
> 
>     Of course it does, it's correct ;) You're mixing 'set +o/-o' with
> 'setopt' and 'unsetopt'. 

  Oohh..damn...yes, of course! You are absolutely right...it must be
  an .....hrrrm.... pixel defect on my....MONITOR! ;)


> If you want to list all options use
> 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> little snippet (for example):
> 
>     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> 
  I pasted that to the commandline (zsh 4.2.5) and pressed <RETURN>. I
> got

zsh: error in flags


I checked several times for....hrrrmmm.....PIXEL ERRORS....but found none.

>     This will give you the list of all option names followed by its
> value. I find this easier to understand that the default of prefixing
> with 'no' and the like.

  Yes, me too...

>     Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

 Happy zshing!
 Meino



> -- 
> Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
> http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
> It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...
> 

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Christian Taylor]

Meino Christian Cramer wrote:
> > If you want to list all options use
> > 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> > options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> > little snippet (for example):
> >
> >     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
>
>   I pasted that to the commandline (zsh 4.2.5) and pressed <RETURN>. I got
> zsh: error in flags

I believe Raul meant:

	for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:)option} $options[$option]

Thanks for the tip Raul, I like this better than the "no" prefixes too.

Christian

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[DervishD]

    Hi Christian :)

 * Christian Taylor <cht@chello.at> dixit:
> Meino Christian Cramer wrote:
> > > If you want to list all options use
> > > 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> > > options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> > > little snippet (for example):
> > >
> > >     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> >
> >   I pasted that to the commandline (zsh 4.2.5) and pressed <RETURN>. I got
> > zsh: error in flags
> I believe Raul meant:
> 	for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:)option} $options[$option]

    Yes ;) As I told Meino, probably my keyboard's fault XDDD
 
> Thanks for the tip Raul, I like this better than the "no" prefixes too.

    You're welcome, but the tip is not such 'tip': since zsh is such
a darn good shell, it provides you with the 'options' associative
array (there are plenty of them, very useful information for the
script writers), it's just a matter of dumping it. Zsh IS great.

    Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

-- 
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[DervishD]

    Hi Meino :)

 * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
> >  * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
> > >        When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
> > >        `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
> > >        prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
> > >        `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
> > >        default.
> > > 
> > >   but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
> > >   always gives me (even for setopt +o!):
> > > 
> > > 	   setopt: string expected after -o
> > 
> >     Of course it does, it's correct ;) You're mixing 'set +o/-o' with
> > 'setopt' and 'unsetopt'. 
>   Oohh..damn...yes, of course! You are absolutely right...it must be
>   an .....hrrrm.... pixel defect on my....MONITOR! ;)

    Yes, I know, it happens to me, too, see below ;))))
 
> > If you want to list all options use
> > 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> > options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> > little snippet (for example):
> > 
> >     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> > 
>   I pasted that to the commandline (zsh 4.2.5) and pressed <RETURN>. I
> > got
> 
> zsh: error in flags
> 
> I checked several times for....hrrrmmm.....PIXEL ERRORS....but found none.

    Probably my monitor had pixel errors, or maybe my keyboard
decided to omit certain keypresses I certainly did XDDDD

    Try this:

    for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option} $options[$option]

    I missed the curly brace at the end of 'option' reference, sorry
O:) We better blame it on our monitors, keyboards... whatever XD
 
    Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

-- 
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Meino Christian Cramer]

From: DervishD <zsh@dervishd.net>
Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 19:32:30 +0200

Hi  Raúl !

 ...thanks a lot for your reply! Now I know howto fix the ....pixel
 errors on my....MONITOR..... can easily be fixed.

 Next I will check my keyboard... :))))) :D

 Thanks to this nice community, too !!!

 Yes, ZSH is a great tool! When I only would adsorb all the "inner
 values" much faster...and understand them with the first try...

 Happy zshing!
 Meino


>     Hi Meino :)
> 
>  * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
> > >  * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
> > > >        When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
> > > >        `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
> > > >        prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
> > > >        `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
> > > >        default.
> > > > 
> > > >   but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
> > > >   always gives me (even for setopt +o!):
> > > > 
> > > > 	   setopt: string expected after -o
> > > 
> > >     Of course it does, it's correct ;) You're mixing 'set +o/-o' with
> > > 'setopt' and 'unsetopt'. 
> >   Oohh..damn...yes, of course! You are absolutely right...it must be
> >   an .....hrrrm.... pixel defect on my....MONITOR! ;)
> 
>     Yes, I know, it happens to me, too, see below ;))))
>  
> > > If you want to list all options use
> > > 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> > > options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> > > little snippet (for example):
> > > 
> > >     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> > > 
> >   I pasted that to the commandline (zsh 4.2.5) and pressed <RETURN>. I
> > > got
> > 
> > zsh: error in flags
> > 
> > I checked several times for....hrrrmmm.....PIXEL ERRORS....but found none.
> 
>     Probably my monitor had pixel errors, or maybe my keyboard
> decided to omit certain keypresses I certainly did XDDDD
> 
>     Try this:
> 
>     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option} $options[$option]
> 
>     I missed the curly brace at the end of 'option' reference, sorry
> O:) We better blame it on our monitors, keyboards... whatever XD
>  
>     Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
> 
> -- 
> Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
> http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
> It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...
> 

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Thorsten Kampe]

* DervishD (2005-07-09 16:17 +0100)
>  * Meino Christian Cramer <Meino.Cramer@gmx.de> dixit:
>>        When listing options (*** by `setopt', `unsetopt', `set -o' or
>>        `set +o'***), those turned on by default appear in the list
>>        prefixed with `no'.  Hence (unless KSH_OPTION_PRINT is set),
>>        `setopt' shows all options whose settings are changed from the
>>        default.
>> 
>>   but giving "setopt +o" or "setopt -o"
>>   always gives me (even for setopt +o!):
>> 
>> 	   setopt: string expected after -o
> 
>     Of course it does, it's correct ;) You're mixing 'set +o/-o' with
> 'setopt' and 'unsetopt'. If you want to list all options use
> 'setopt', without arguments, or 'set -o'. If you want to show ALL
> options, no matter if they have their default value or not, use this
> little snippet (for example):
> 
>     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> 
>     This will give you the list of all option names followed by its
> value. I find this easier to understand that the default of prefixing
> with 'no' and the like.

Isn't that a bit "too much"?

"autoload -U allopt; allopt" or "set -o" shows you all options and
there state.

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[DervishD]

    Hi Thorsten :)

 * Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> dixit:
> >     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
> Isn't that a bit "too much"?
> 
> "autoload -U allopt; allopt" or "set -o" shows you all options and
> there state.

    Have you looked at the code for 'allopt'? I think that *that* is
too much ;) This is shorter and produces more or less the same
results. And you can store it in a function, of course. The only
advantage of 'allopt' is that it accepts a list of names or part of
names to search for using grep. But that is easily added to the
above, too.

    Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

-- 
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
http://www.pleyades.net & http://www.gotesdelluna.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to...

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Thorsten Kampe]

* DervishD (2005-07-10 08:18 +0100)
>  * Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> dixit:
>>>     for option in ${(ko)options}; print ${(r:21:}option $options[$option]
>> Isn't that a bit "too much"?
>> 
>> "autoload -U allopt; allopt" or "set -o" shows you all options and
>> there state.
> 
>     Have you looked at the code for 'allopt'? I think that *that* is
> too much ;)

Maybe for the one who wrote it but not for the one who uses allopt.

"allopt" was the way to go before "set -o" was introduced recently.
Before that you had to do "setopt kshoptionprint; setopt; unsetopt"
which of course in a way was inaccurate because "kshoptionprint" was
modified.

T.

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jul 10, 12:38pm, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
} Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
}
} * DervishD (2005-07-10 08:18 +0100)
} >     Have you looked at the code for 'allopt'? I think that *that* is
} > too much ;)
} 
} "allopt" was the way to go before "set -o" was introduced recently.
} Before that you had to do "setopt kshoptionprint; setopt; unsetopt"

"allopt" could be improved by switching to "set -o" but that isn't
really why it was written.  It was written to eliminate the double
negatives in the output.

Run

    diff =(set -o) =(allopt)

and you'll see e.g.

1c1
< noaliases             off
---
> aliases               on
3c3
< noalwayslastprompt    off
---
> alwayslastprompt      on

(etc.)

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Meino Christian Cramer]

From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:26:37 +0000

Hi,

 :) sourceing reporter works fine ! 
hanks for the hint !

 Meino


> On Jul 10, 12:38pm, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> } Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
> }
> } * DervishD (2005-07-10 08:18 +0100)
> } >     Have you looked at the code for 'allopt'? I think that *that* is
> } > too much ;)
> } 
> } "allopt" was the way to go before "set -o" was introduced recently.
> } Before that you had to do "setopt kshoptionprint; setopt; unsetopt"
> 
> "allopt" could be improved by switching to "set -o" but that isn't
> really why it was written.  It was written to eliminate the double
> negatives in the output.
> 
> Run
> 
>     diff =(set -o) =(allopt)
> 
> and you'll see e.g.
> 
> 1c1
> < noaliases             off
> ---
> > aliases               on
> 3c3
> < noalwayslastprompt    off
> ---
> > alwayslastprompt      on
> 
> (etc.)
> 

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jul 9,  4:52pm, Meino Christian Cramer wrote:
}
}  what commands I have to give to ZSH to show all "internal" settings?

Read "man zshcontrib" (or the "User contributions" section in "info zsh")
and look for the section named "Dumping Shell State".

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Meino Christian Cramer]

From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 16:07:46 +0000

 I tried reporter. But for example

  alias 

 given on the commandline gives me a lot more aliasses defined as
 reported by "reporter all" (only dumps two aliasses)

 So I cannot decide whether I can trust the rest of the output of
 reporter.

 

> On Jul 9,  4:52pm, Meino Christian Cramer wrote:
> }
> }  what commands I have to give to ZSH to show all "internal" settings?
> 
> Read "man zshcontrib" (or the "User contributions" section in "info zsh")
> and look for the section named "Dumping Shell State".
> 

Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jul 10,  6:30am, Meino Christian Cramer wrote:
} Subject: Re: Asking ZSH: How are you ?
}
}   alias 
} 
}  given on the commandline gives me a lot more aliasses defined as
}  reported by "reporter all" (only dumps two aliasses)

Let me guess:

alias run-help=man
alias which-command=whence

I suspect you're not using reporter correctly.  Those are the two built-
in aliases.

You can't run "reporter" as a shell script. (Well, you can, but it won't
give the correct results; it'll tell you what's in your /etc/zshenv, and
not much else.)  It has to be either read into the current shell with
the "." or "source" commands, or autoloaded and then run as a shell
function.

E.g.

    source reporter aliases