From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3676 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2002 18:43:45 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Jan 2002 18:43:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 16834 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2002 18:43:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 16454 Received: (qmail 16822 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2002 18:43:39 -0000 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: PATCH: updated _zstyle and cleanup of related stuff In-reply-to: ""Bart Schaefer""'s message of "Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:06:25 GMT." <1020114180625.ZM18586@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:43:12 +0000 Message-ID: <13601.1011033792@csr.com> From: Peter Stephenson "Bart Schaefer" wrote: > See the thread beginning with zsh-workers/15950. I think we can do (#q) as proposed there, except as I already said, I'd prefer simply to ignore (#q) where it isn't treated as a glob qualifier, i.e. gets through to the pattern code, since it means you no longer need to rewrite glob patterns to test against the filenames, which I consider a highly desirable feature. Causing an error if the (#q) gets through to the pattern code would be fairly simple, however. Scanning for (#q)'s not at the end and causing an error in the top-level globbing code instead is the hack I want to avoid, but I could do it if pushed; then the globbing code would be safe but the pattern code could still ignore (#q)'s. The natural rule for bareglobs is that they work if and only if they appear at the end, if and only if BAREGLOBQUAL is set, so (.)(#q*) is just one qualifier, but (#q*)(.) is two. However, I wouldn't recommend combining the two forms anyway, so I don't think this needs a big discussion, just a reasonable rule. The only hairy bit of implementing this is that we'll need an extra level of logic to handle the logical and of different qualifiers. As I said, I don't think the rule of applying them `as if they appeared in a single list' is rational --- treating (#q/,*)(#qW) as (#q/,*W) doesn't seem to make sense to me. -- Peter Stephenson Software Engineer CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK Tel: +44 (0)1223 392070 ********************************************************************** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. **********************************************************************