From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2080 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2016 23:19:41 -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: 39001 Received: (qmail 2239 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2016 23:19:41 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(209.85.192.174):SA:0(0.0/5.0):. Processed in 0.12634 secs); 05 Aug 2016 23:19:41 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: schaefer@brasslantern.com X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at brasslantern.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brasslantern-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:date:to:subject:mime-version; bh=e1wkpQgUnL5z/+xea8TZgLpMYuzGKUvIjTBch4pY+6w=; b=RQFVdLLu8vA5TfuwqzukbPfKlcHdE/K0hNzNxWpNWe1dkq8QVSr2YWBn/HpasfyWMY 8K9fdMd73dICWzfA7XGMq98Y469vzE1AS1JXGFTBDBUSAWVZTvy5sM4euTPdeRoJWuiu XXSQkal2irYwGTuxIvfXmeSHJLNyfHSleSyFxEzzJ5cc6kWB1b5+d7qS+64DMmEHTMsQ cgPfnZc+th5tLRpaa1Geh4dLhOs4la5hG3PDDq7Mlz3Kkc5P5qEqESSqLRzVIhbcA2XE +Xo8AMtY0bxCIlW7kM1VfQo3iDi6MnBqnoFhWBOiigKoys5dnICKQFkXJw9dYcAeiWF/ Ng+Q== 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:to:subject:mime-version; bh=e1wkpQgUnL5z/+xea8TZgLpMYuzGKUvIjTBch4pY+6w=; b=DVBjypNJeXv4fO8x+rT1h+MlfGG0+tMhSriGY3qwHxqIvKBNawJqwlQ0WnfBoepWB4 e1KlX47gvCkH7nsfTum2y5jU8PVgyYdFKseDjrT4/PuWdsWicsNaMNhFlEfr4FKaVPor 46K9Fh6anSC9toX/vHtG6deJifL259cDSsaGiMsmByLbyCjvPWOCC5encCuvf7gBp+Bv mPBWbiqIyWp1RUGxFXAKG+qQaq+Y0DgOcoyt0hZS5XBR6OK6oSeFqx4W+QRHRnhPttSD 4qv/8SILnNu7GT0O4lLJtEZiPompgG0JtAGCGCduO63CEeRkaYPBjZUEk4Jh6aVbLGuS LKHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouu2dhowepVSGA6yQ8gUuQVGn7If3zmiPNZ4I88TIpCkKLqMbIhcEQpthOC4btHjeg== X-Received: by 10.98.74.91 with SMTP id x88mr138930172pfa.79.1470439173747; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 16:19:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <160805161937.ZM11838@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 16:19:37 -0700 X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Deliberately abstract question about calling zle widgets MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Ignoring for the moment the pseudo-keymaps that switch on internal thingy names of builtin widgets ... can anyone tell me whether the following is a true assertion? Given an absence of other user-defined widgets and a function wrap_builtin_widget() { zle .$WIDGET "$@" } then for any (every) builtin widget bltinwid, zle -N bltinwid wrap_builtin_widget has no observable side-effects. When I say "no side effects" I'm referring to things like loss of suffix autoremoval when bltinwid is a completion widget, changed "undo" handling, mishandled numeric prefixes, etc. I'm not looking for obscure ways to break it such as aliasing or disabling the zle command. If the assertion is known to be false, please name any builtin widgets you are aware of for which this assertion does not hold. Thanks.