From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2712 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2009 16:31:56 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 Received: from new-brage.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.254.104) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Jun 2009 16:31:56 -0000 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at sunsite.dk does not designate permitted sender hosts) Received: (qmail 71194 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2009 16:23:49 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2009 16:23:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 10344 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2009 16:23:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 27036 Received: (qmail 10313 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2009 16:23:42 -0000 Received: from bifrost.dotsrc.org (130.225.254.106) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 5 Jun 2009 16:23:42 -0000 Received: from vms173003pub.verizon.net (vms173003pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.3]) by bifrost.dotsrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584D3801E289 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 18:23:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from torch.brasslantern.com ([96.249.201.13]) by vms173003.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KKR00J7IUBXX040@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> for zsh-workers@sunsite.dk; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:14:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from torch.brasslantern.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by torch.brasslantern.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n55FEKoH032374 for ; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 08:14:21 -0700 Received: (from schaefer@localhost) by torch.brasslantern.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id n55FEKmt032373 for zsh-workers@sunsite.dk; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 08:14:20 -0700 From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <090605081420.ZM32372@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 08:14:20 -0700 In-reply-to: <2161.1244200252@csr.com> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "run-help's man arguments" (Jun 5, 12:10pm) References: <2161.1244200252@csr.com> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: run-help's man arguments MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.94.2/9430/Fri Jun 5 17:23:39 2009 on bifrost X-Virus-Status: Clean On Jun 5, 12:10pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } } run-help got changed to invoke "man $@" rather than "man $1". This was } described as being "to allow the specification of sections and other man } options through" (sic, presumably something missing?) "options [to pass] through" I think. } Nobody's ever complained about this, but this is surely weird; that's } not how you use run-help, the $@ is the stuff on the command line } which doesn't include anything for "man" unless you type it yourself, } which is rather against the spirit of run-help (and very well hidden). Someone probably mistook run-help for a function that one is intended to be able to type out by hand (rather than invoke with a keystroke), and wanted it to become a superset of the "man" command. Although how that would work for any of the other variations on where a command is found, I have no idea. } However, the original query remains. Why do we need $@ rather than $1? I don't think we ever did. I suppose one could do something such as alias run-help='\run-help 1' to try to restrict help to executable commands only, but then that will fail for anything that is not an external command, so ...