From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12921 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 19:45:16 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 19:45:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 248 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2001 19:45:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13477 Received: (qmail 236 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 19:45:08 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <010214114457.ZM1430@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:44:57 -0800 In-Reply-To: Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: PATCH: Re: :r modifier" (Feb 14, 6:40pm) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail Lite (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: :r modifier MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Feb 14, 6:40pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: > Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: :r modifier > Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > > I'd hate to beat a dead horse, but it's not clear to me > > whether 13280 has been rejected or just forgotten. > > That's because it's not clear to anyone. I don't have any objections, > does anyone know if they are relying on the old (somewhat unexpected) > behaviour? I don't believe I'm relying on the old behavior; I have a certain sort of nostalgia for it because that's how the original csh behaves, but I suppose we're long beyond worrying about compatibility with *that*.