From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3/2) with ESMTP id AAA17748 for ; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 00:18:58 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA19172; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 10:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 10:14:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Zefram Message-Id: <10559.199607191412@stone.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Incompatibility in zsh-3.0-pre3 ? To: hzoli@cs.elte.hu (Zoltan Hidvegi) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 15:12:43 +0100 (BST) Cc: acs@world.std.com, zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu In-Reply-To: <199607190031.CAA02517@hzoli.ppp.cs.elte.hu> from "Zoltan Hidvegi" at Jul 19, 96 02:31:52 am X-Loop: zefram@dcs.warwick.ac.uk X-Stardate: [-31]7832.96 X-US-Congress: Moronic fuckers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YaqCF.0.Vh4.-Wvxn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1710 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu >> I just want to go on record as stating that I think this is really NOT a good >> thing. IMO, *way* too many scripts and functions are going to break. Bart's > >Seeing the great opposition I'll probably reverse this change in the next >release (these will remain reserved words but will be treated more >specially). Actually, I think the new behaviour is preferable, though when I first heard about it I was of the same opinion as the writer you quote above. It's really very easy to correct those scripts that break (though that is rather a lot of them). -zefram