From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25594 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2013 03:42:42 -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: 32006 Received: (qmail 2405 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2013 03:42:25 -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 Message-id: <131117194226.ZM3733@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 19:42:26 -0800 In-reply-to: <20131118003043.GA2709@localhost.localdomain> Comments: In reply to Han Pingtian "Re: [PATCH] don't treat alone grouping pattern as glob qualifier" (Nov 18, 8:30am) References: <20131117052423.GA20827@localhost.localdomain> <131117104041.ZM30561@torch.brasslantern.com> <20131118003043.GA2709@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't treat alone grouping pattern as glob qualifier MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Nov 18, 8:30am, Han Pingtian wrote: } Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't treat alone grouping pattern as glob qualifier } } On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 10:40:41AM -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote: } > However, I can't immediately think of any reason why a paren should be } > considered part of a "trailing set" when nothing precedes it ... } } Yes, because there is nothing before (s*), it wouldn't be treated as } qualifiers, I think. Anybody else going to chime in on this? Are there other cases where the (s == str) test in the patch could be true but the paren really should be treated as introducing a qualifier?