From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16860 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2014 17:54:16 -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: 32873 Received: (qmail 5543 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2014 17:54:14 -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: <140716105417.ZM2695@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 10:54:17 -0700 In-reply-to: <20140716173056.6515047e@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: history-incremental-search-backward weird behavior for multiline commands in 5.0.x" (Jul 16, 5:30pm) References: <140716091007.ZM2526@torch.brasslantern.com> <20140716173056.6515047e@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: history-incremental-search-backward weird behavior for multiline commands in 5.0.x MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 16, 5:30pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: } Subject: Re: history-incremental-search-backward weird behavior for multil } } I think the load parsing must be broken --- I'm pretty sure it always } used doubled backslashes to signal this and it obviously used to work. This appears to have somethign to do with workers/28332 and 28339, but I'm not yet sure exactly what.