"no_nomatch" and glob qualifiers

"no_nomatch" and glob qualifiers

[Bart Schaefer]

Consider:

% setopt nonomatch
% echo x(/)       
x(/)
% echo x(a) 
zsh: number expected
% 

Should that not have output "x(a)" ?

Re: "no_nomatch" and glob qualifiers

[Mikael Magnusson]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:22 AM, Bart Schaefer
<schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> Consider:
>
> % setopt nonomatch
> % echo x(/)
> x(/)
> % echo x(a)
> zsh: number expected
> %
>
> Should that not have output "x(a)" ?

I feel like there is a difference between "this is a valid glob that
has no matches" and "this is a syntax error", and this is that
difference.

% echo a(
>

also doesn't "work".

-- 
Mikael Magnusson

Re: "no_nomatch" and glob qualifiers

[Bart Schaefer]

On Oct 6,  1:47am, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
}
} > % echo x(a)
} > zsh: number expected
} >
} > Should that not have output "x(a)" ?
} 
} I feel like there is a difference between "this is a valid glob that
} has no matches" and "this is a syntax error", and this is that
} difference.

If that were it then nobadpattern should fix it, yet for qualifiers it
still fails.

% setopt nonomatch nobadpattern
% echo x(z)
zsh: unknown file attribute: z
% 

But on the other hand:

% unsetopt nobadpattern
% echo x(,)
x(,)
% 

} % echo a(
} >
} 
} also doesn't "work".

Close the paren and you get

zsh: unknown file attribute: \n

I can counter-example that one, too:

% echo x(:
> )
x(:
)
% 

A missing numeric argument is an error, but an invalid colon-modifier
is not?

(I'm not really arguing that we should change anything, unless somebody
is convinced by this discussion that I should be.)