From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7743 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2015 22:11:54 -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: 36790 Received: (qmail 17026 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2015 22:11:53 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 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=ODIbCzdZNH2FRIopI8m6GA9sn8Au5c75NAvDwIDMgNU=; b=UnKyiz7AFWFQv6ll7gj4q+6aXNkKep7/7t5LAmoBrOjZ6UV0GgCE9iLFch9QYH94Cs KDKcdiBMxxRXU9GZfJiBri9g17oRZ9o4mCRZLDBlOULtHNSRJsyLKHiwrM/7tyy/1sRc F8NxzTFxf+KRTUE+/JOrawT+Q+fnQ/KYZDbLpmeLpF0ryNLFoAwRSDQq5yQseMk7YSi6 an1I15KYz5A7jVHVRG4XLi5DueTG81uLwkqs3Eld1QBe93eAN7KvMZKhGz1T98jcKBlS RLknJ79RI33DMwNaKqfgv/8zDl5adHmZ+ckfukg9oJGfKBTUnH927xHVPuqcdduJ36Ke jGug== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnhoh79ZiOJasqtzkQudl+TTMVMc799WP01hANYm++zf0hS0d8HYg2tFapepswPb8mj/8WT X-Received: by 10.60.47.199 with SMTP id f7mr17981484oen.54.1444083110939; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 15:11:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <151005151148.ZM4523@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:11:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20151005215134.GA1959@tarsus.local2> Comments: In reply to Daniel Shahaf "Re: [PATCH] Add API wrapper to ${+_comps[...]}" (Oct 5, 9:51pm) References: <20150930182948.GD2003@tarsus.local2> <151003174919.ZM31542@torch.brasslantern.com> <20151005215134.GA1959@tarsus.local2> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add API wrapper to ${+_comps[...]} MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Oct 5, 9:51pm, Daniel Shahaf wrote: } Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add API wrapper to ${+_comps[...]} } } Bart Schaefer wrote on Sat, Oct 03, 2015 at 17:49:19 -0700: } > } > (Why two separate patches both to compsys.yo?) } } One logical change per commit. But you don't care about one logical commit per zsh-workers sequence number? I mean, I'm not unreasonably sticky about it, but I try to keep it that way. } > On the other hand there are tests for whether a particular function } > is defined. If that function is destined to be assigned to _comps[x] } > perhaps it would be better to check for _comps[x] already defined } > instead. } } _comps[x] being already defined in what sense? I can think of three } meanings: (a) hash key exists That sense. The point being that if we're going to bother defining "compexists" then maybe we ought to use it instead of (( ${+functions[_name]} )). It couldn't replace all such tests, since in most cases those are "helper" functions rather than values in $_comps, but perhaps some. I'm trying to find a metric for usefulness.