Re: [PATCH] _arguments: Escape colons and backslashes in $opt_args unambiguously.

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>]

On Sep 4,  6:26pm, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
}
} Is it okay to refer to NEWS from the manual?

Are there any other examples of the manual referring directly to the
behavior of previous versions?

It's not the kind of thing it's easy to search for, but I can't think
of any, so my inclination would be to drop your parenthetical Note:.

} In the manual I wrote "See NEWS" even though the pointed-to text is in
} README because (a) NEWS includes README by reference, (b) I doubted
} readers would follow a reference to README in that context.

I doubt readers will follow a NEWS reference either.  If this is
important enough to reference -- which I don't think it is -- then
it's important enough to say it here, not cross-reference somewhere
outside of the regular documentation tree, and certainly it shouldn't
require going to NEWS, finding nothing, and then having to realize
it might be in README.

} +ambiguity: if the -x option took two arguments (as in
} +    _arguments : -x:foo:${action}:bar:$action
} +), it would be impossible to tell from $opt_args whether the command-line
} +was '-x foo\:bar' or '-x foo\\ bar'.

Is this example correct?  Isn't the actual ambiguity between
[[[ -x foo\:bar ]]] (one arg) and [[[ -x foo bar ]]] (two args)?  If
I'm wrong, what is it about your explanation that confused me?

There's probably still an ambiguity between [[[ -x foo bar ]]] and
[[[ -x foo -x bar ]]] ...