From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-31887-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 18036 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2013 16:44:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 31887
Received: (qmail 17483 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2013 16:44:37 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) 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=3.3.2
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-id: <131024094409.ZM28342@torch.brasslantern.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 09:44:09 -0700
In-reply-to: <20131024170352.053ead5f@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
 "Re: Strange function/pipestatus behavior, maybe a scope bug?" (Oct 24,
 5:03pm)
References:
 <CAMeu-1WYhBr-hbcgXQy3gEGOSSpS2FFmxDa+QDFyN1m+7Z1kQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20131023092155.5ba8a54b@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<CAMeu-1WsKO71YfJ+aO9uy=_oGLJEsKh-yL8HJ_rMicqmCj2FQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20131023221412.5cdecd76@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
	<131023221548.ZM2352@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<20131024095713.44d2982e@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<20131024164829.55842279@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<20131024170352.053ead5f@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005)
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: Strange function/pipestatus behavior, maybe a scope bug?
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Oct 24,  5:03pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: Strange function/pipestatus behavior, maybe a scope bug?
}
} On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:48:29 +0100
} Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com> wrote:
} > There is some bad interaction with completion, at least on my setup
} > (happens from a vanilla setup, too):
} > 
} > % true | true | false
} > % print $pipest<TAB>
} > 0
} > 
} > This doesn't seem to happen with hooks, so completion is failing to save
} > something it should.
} 
} Hmm... does the following have any bad effects?  If we're really only
} after the return value of the function, I don't think it should...

I don't see any reason why that wouldn't be correct.  Possibly the
save/restore of lastval there predates doshfunc() having similar code?