From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29959 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2015 04:01:46 -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: 35005 Received: (qmail 5975 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2015 04:01:44 -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=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments :references:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=JVZJLr7fKietJykRTO517YdElEn7HDJj7CRjCdTynsM=; b=jYQW6GdqTYGCHj29nT0CFiwcCSdDwgubJNAFDE4ASdUukNZ+uctw/HN09FQ2qa0cHA E7UNBd5DatSlBe/T3d+2UR0+amFLpKkySbxyXDssfgZqdbgh2AxJLN8hhAnn3iFo35VS k8pr73QhT6oBQR6/7jqDJB4JXGHmsjRH+8UYC1y8+nMFs81/NeouBv0L3GVWsVdTlKqv JGui0M1tqWfixgvpp1TSmwDDVh04OJ3mFGA+sOTAi85+4vsHXS5O1f41z6is17GXMj+f dYkMlsKQN6Cx4qWZEU6BflLHEGasgqwrndc83tBxbbrV0ChQw460pblHLpZjtqJ+q3ba SORQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnlWU6xIxg80PgyQ8rQaJfsIiThWwhhoJpn7ZCsP1BmzJ+dqYVSWCuvVE8VxHCDlsC0TNqo X-Received: by 10.60.177.73 with SMTP id co9mr1855641oec.5.1430366503502; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <150429210140.ZM31974@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:01:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1430352483-30739-1-git-send-email-mikachu@gmail.com> Comments: In reply to Mikael Magnusson "PATCH: Don't define internal params directly in hook function scope" (Apr 30, 2:08am) References: <1430352483-30739-1-git-send-email-mikachu@gmail.com> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Don't define internal params directly in hook function scope MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Apr 30, 2:08am, Mikael Magnusson wrote: } } Something feels very wrong about this :). I'm not committing it. I prefer the original approach, if only because it means you have to think about what you're doing before mucking with things that are read-only for a reason. (I believe the answer about adding a new level of scope around the "local -h" has appeared on zsh-users before, though I can't think of a good search term to find it.)