From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16033 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2000 18:41:50 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 12 Jul 2000 18:41:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 12335 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2000 18:41:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 12236 Received: (qmail 12320 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2000 18:41:35 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1000712184120.ZM18506@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 18:41:20 +0000 In-Reply-To: <0FXL002CJGG9E2@la-la.cambridgesiliconradio.com> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: Bug in ${(z)...} lexing, or what?" (Jul 12, 5:57pm) References: <0FXL002CJGG9E2@la-la.cambridgesiliconradio.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: Peter Stephenson , zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: Bug in ${(z)...} lexing, or what? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 12, 5:57pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } Subject: Re: Bug in ${(z)...} lexing, or what? } } That was before applying the patch (the correct behaviour). After, I get: } } [[ } a } = } ( } ; } } with interactivecomments set (which is wrong), and what Sven was reporting } without it (which isn't great). I'd much prefer the old behaviour in this } case, but the interactivecomments variant is definitely broken. The situation is exactly reversed inside a ZLE widget: The behavior with both interactivecomments and without is now correct inside the widget, but broken outside. So was all Sven's patch acheived to invert some condition? -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net