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 DAA07085 for <mason@werple.mira.net.au>; Wed, 3 Jul 1996 03:10:06 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA28758; Tue, 2 Jul 1996 13:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 13:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Anthony Heading <aheading@jpmorgan.com>
Message-Id: <199607021658.RAA22275@gmp-etpres1.uk.jpmorgan.com>
Subject: Re: Tag functions with shell options?
To: pws@ifh.de (Peter Stephenson)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 17:57:57 +0100 (BST)
Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
In-Reply-To: <199607021537.RAA16181@hydra.ifh.de> from "Peter Stephenson" at Jul 2, 96 05:37:58 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"El9GM1.0.D17.6NLsn"@euclid>
Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
X-Mailing-List: <zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu> archive/latest/1508
X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu

Peter wrote:
> If they are playing fair, however, try this function.

Thanks.  That's a bit cleaner than the hack I was resorting
to - viz . <( sed /blaa/ foo.sh) trying to edit the functions
on the way in.

On a longer term, perhaps lexical closures are possibility?
It would be pleasingly complicated.

Anthony