From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8760 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2000 18:24:21 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Mar 2000 18:24:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 22170 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2000 18:24:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10140 Received: (qmail 22152 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2000 18:24:13 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1000314182409.ZM11474@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 18:24:08 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1000311075721.ZM19210@candle.brasslantern.com> Comments: In reply to "Bart Schaefer" "Re: The `zle' command and traps" (Mar 11, 7:57am) References: <200003091221.NAA25853@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> <1000311075721.ZM19210@candle.brasslantern.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: zle -U MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 11, 7:57am, Bart Schaefer wrote: } } zle -U frob } } This results in "brof" being inserted onto the command line. Sven sent a patch to fix that, but there's still a problem with this: zle -U f zle -U r zle -U o zle -U b Once again we get "brof". Maybe we should just admit that there is no input "queue" (only a stack), as is done with "print -z"? -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com