From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27938 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2010 20:25:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 28509 Received: (qmail 23574 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2010 20:25:18 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at closedmail.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <101209122512.ZM8745@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 12:25:12 -0800 In-reply-to: <20101209181632.27d47e95@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: Another ${(z)param} buglet" (Dec 9, 6:16pm) References: <101207203441.ZM4340@torch.brasslantern.com> <20101208175103.40d6cc29@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <101209074233.ZM8003@torch.brasslantern.com> <20101209181632.27d47e95@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: Another ${(z)param} buglet MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Dec 9, 6:16pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } } On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 07:42:33 -0800 } Bart Schaefer wrote: } > There isn't yet a (Z) flag; perhaps we could make that the equivalent } > of turning on interactivecomments, and leave (z) as it was? } } Wondered about that, but there are so many possible tweaks to word } splitting I'm trying to think of a more flexible way than simply two } letters (that doesn't involve anything as gross as a shell option). Perhaps leave (z) alone and introduce (Z:stuff:) where stuff can be a set of controls for how the parse is applied? Another possibility would be to introduce a builtin ala zparseopts that dismantles the string and populates a hash, or something.