From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21657 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2016 03:01:56 -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: 39371 Received: (qmail 23821 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2016 03:01:56 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-pf0-f177.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(209.85.192.177):SA:0(0.0/5.0):. Processed in 0.79243 secs); 17 Sep 2016 03:01:56 -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:in-reply-to:comments:references:to:subject :mime-version; bh=Ptqb1Cs1X9V+dsytICB3M5KAvy5zT1wEWFuvpJmg64M=; b=0LlW60sdilm8vCgUnZ0NRGq7mySaRSc1AY1l7nmrnXqUhg5SJ6KMEe1ZmEn+sFAWLW fFVm9CCq/7dL9NSfItPS4dDxHYZ4cpsrBbTx2cApUupYouZGaRUtfhTY9YFwnfo1lj5c zxVKW1xm6efpUwvdOu7k1tWF4Onmx9JiZuUTGsVXYI/YWTScXtaip/AvBACLavSBdLJb vS42e82w0YI2hFrMyS6Yu1JpvHHH53beSEyj8tvX70Bd2U4bTZNbZn55olmZnClDhhDS v8xfXMp+YkBLo85svyX/wChRPNdwlqdBdbloWIwJLjQt/80q3VBWRrDzFRnrI2AAgL2Z laBw== 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; bh=Ptqb1Cs1X9V+dsytICB3M5KAvy5zT1wEWFuvpJmg64M=; b=kWpphRmHENCH/CtD2A94Pha9gNUxFsIepGiojGax//VvjTHkgDMgU629jMyrQMwuAx CH5DbarqTPGmM5Xg1chpgyXD+Ig6XT8JvPg+iW9RvpFlpAkUs6Y7U0Uoj3O8W8ULa5H6 5NfDnWhfD0EDdO069OxwGtlwdjo8SO98gxOw7Re8YgXPPI8KY5rW8fAsR5oM0neBWmdV kzS5L6toyfioT6rDntKD1OdbCDOUm90fNnCEyxdDb/HCq6acMm/hECJH9rdkJQmq6UB6 j1GxvYRSwp9fJi0WAWFlyk0CBG8GK8K4unlQ4GJlrZK71KfZdbwJegTCXGh/UGdkXjMR ZXEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOFAERv4fBBUIHudaoFFFEFfLBkFRtfZofGCcDv+USkDBpAEWTv4a5D/inRS3r8YQ== X-Received: by 10.98.30.133 with SMTP id e127mr28103632pfe.104.1474081309438; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:01:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <160916200205.ZM27241@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:02:05 -0700 In-Reply-To: <10734.1474068633@hydra.kiddle.eu> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "Re: Off-by-one with select-*-shell-word text object?" (Sep 17, 1:30am) References: <160916102137.ZM11290@torch.brasslantern.com> <76020.1474058827@hydra.kiddle.eu> <160916142248.ZM26196@torch.brasslantern.com> <10734.1474068633@hydra.kiddle.eu> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: Off-by-one with select-*-shell-word text object? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sep 17, 1:30am, Oliver Kiddle wrote: } Subject: Re: Off-by-one with select-*-shell-word text object? } } Bart wrote: } > It also occurs to me to wonder whether set_bindk = 0 *ever* makes sense } > for builtin widgets. Can somebody give me an example of a builtin that } > would care about the widget name of its user-defined caller? } } I think it matters for the k2 == bindk test in getvirange(). That gets me wondering about the execzlefunc() call in getvirange(). E.g. in vicmd mode, cS changes nothing but leaves me in insert mode. Probably should be an error to invoke any ZLE_VIOPER widget *other* than the same one again? But I digress ... } zlecallhook sets set_bindk. That doesn't seem entirely useful Actually it's quite useful, and the recently-added add-zle-hook-widget function depends on it (to the point that zle-line-pre-redraw was changed to match). } run-help, which-command and zap-to-char suffer from the same } issue as the text object widgets: they use bindk to select their } behaviour. } } So any thoughts on this solution? I'd probably write it as an assignment of setbindk rather than put the whole expression in the execzlefunc argument, but otherwise this seems sensible on the face of it.