From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5013 invoked from network); 8 Mar 1999 15:49:16 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 8 Mar 1999 15:49:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 343 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 1999 15:48:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 5685 Received: (qmail 334 invoked from network); 8 Mar 1999 15:48:36 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: awayteam.zanshin.com: schaefer set sender to schaefer@tiny.zanshin.com using -f From: Bart Schaefer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14051.37325.463850.598816@localhost.localdomain> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 01:01:01 -0800 (PST) To: Sven Wischnowsky Cc: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: small parameter fix In-Reply-To: <199903080850.JAA11456@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> References: <199903080850.JAA11456@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.65a under Emacs 20.3.5.1 Reply-To: Bart Schaefer Sven Wischnowsky writes: > > ...although I'm not sure if it was not intentional. If it was, I'd > like to hear the reason. This: > > ${${...}[...]} > > previously didn't really work: if the inner ${...} produced an array > with only one element, the outer ${...} treated it as a string and the > subscript gave the n'th character. AHA! This must be the reason that "${${(@)...}...}" is required in so many mystifying circumstances. I, too, would like to hear whether the previous behavior was intentional ... this change does potentially break scripts, including I think 3.0.5 scripts, so we'd better tread carefully.