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 CAA19735 for <mason@werple.mira.net.au>; Sun, 28 Jul 1996 02:04:27 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA23029; Sat, 27 Jul 1996 11:55:54 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 11:55:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Zoltan Hidvegi <hzoli@cs.elte.hu>
Message-Id: <199607271555.RAA13240@bolyai.cs.elte.hu>
Subject: Re: zsh-3.0-pre4 released
To: schaefer@nbn.com
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 17:55:11 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
In-Reply-To: <960726213003.ZM20287@candle.brasslantern.com> from Bart Schaefer at "Jul 26, 96 09:30:03 pm"
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Eotvos University, Budapest, Hungary
Phone: (36 1)2669833 ext: 2667, home phone: (36 1) 2752368
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL16 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5sf3t1.0.gd5.9mZ-n"@euclid>
Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
X-Mailing-List: <zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu> archive/latest/1790
X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu

> Hmm ... you seem to be saying that
> 
> 	TRAPHUP() { echo Hangup }
> 	trap "echo Hang UP" 1
> 	
> causes an implicit "unfunction TRAPHUP".  What, then, happens if
> 
> 	trap "echo Hangup" 1
> 	TRAPHUP() { echo Hang UP }
> 
> ??  Does the TRAPHUP definition cause an implicit "trap - 1"?

Yes or course.  That's quite similar to the old behaviour.

Zoltan