From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3/2) with ESMTP id HAA08439 for <mason@werple.mira.net.au>; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 07:44:51 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA16758; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:38:14 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 17:38:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Anthony Heading <aheading@jpmorgan.com>
Message-Id: <199607012135.WAA08217@gmp-etpres1.uk.jpmorgan.com>
Subject: Re: cshjunkieparen bothers me (and always has)
To: hzoli@cs.elte.hu (Zoltan Hidvegi)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 22:35:33 +0100 (BST)
Cc: schaefer@nbn.com, zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
In-Reply-To: <199607012102.XAA09412@bolyai.cs.elte.hu> from "Zoltan Hidvegi" at Jul 1, 96 11:02:11 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"f0Ccz1.0.m54.6L4sn"@euclid>
Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
X-Mailing-List: <zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu> archive/latest/1499
X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu

Zoltan wrote:
> I approve this without cshjunkietests since it makes the code simpler.  The
> other reason is that the while list; { ... } syntax always worked.
> 
> Below is the documentation [...]

> ! Many of zsh's complex commands have alternate forms.  These particular
>   versions of complex commands should be considered deprecated and may be
>   removed in the future.  The versions in the previous section should be
>   preferred instead.

If this syntax is being developed, it seems weird that it's deprecated.  Does
anyone really want to get rid of it?   If so, fine.  But if the sentiment is
that these forms should be available without setting options, shouldn't they:
  a) be supported;
  b) not be advised against in the manual?

It seems a pity not to make the most of this useful feature.

Anthony