Re: PATCH: expanding parameters like echo/print builtins

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>]

On May 11,  6:22pm, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH: expanding parameters like echo/print builtins
}
} Do I need to clarify in the docs that you write g:: to give neither of
} the three flags? Just g by itself is an error, like for the other
} flags that take options.

I don't think that's a problem, but yes it should be doc'd.

BTW, the construct "... the exception of the next sentence.  In none
of these modes ..." is a little clunky; probably OK to just say "...
except that in none of these modes ..."

} for this flag there are a limited number of options, so : could be
} obligatory for the field separator, then you could say just (g). Does
} anyone care about this? :) (It would also mean we can't use : as a new
} flag though).

I don't like the idea of limiting the delimiter to ":".

RE Oliver's suggestion of a (\) flag -- I considered that too but it
is not clear whether the backslash might be removed in some contexts
before zsh gets around to parsing the flags.

I suppose we could use (/) (to mean "reverse the backslashes"?) but ...