From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10061 invoked from network); 7 Sep 1999 09:02:59 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Sep 1999 09:02:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 27195 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 1999 09:02:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7682 Received: (qmail 27187 invoked from network); 7 Sep 1999 09:02:49 -0000 Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 11:02:48 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199909070902.LAA02787@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: Peter Stephenson's message of Tue, 07 Sep 1999 10:57:22 +0200 Subject: Re: PATCH: completion for perldoc Peter Stephenson wrote: > Adam Spiers wrote: > > > _perldoc { > > > ... > > > > I forgot to say: this kills zsh :-( > > There's no () after _perldoc, so it thinks it's a function call, not a > definition. You just generate hundreds of recursive calls to _perldoc > until the machine gets board of having enough space on the stack, or > something. Ah, was that it? I thought he had just copied the bodies from somewhere and added the `perldoc {' by hand. So, just forget the end of my last message, please. > The may be a bug here. Has anyone the slightest idea why `_perldoc {' > is accepted as a complete command line with the argument "{"? Dunno, but `ksh' and `bash' behave in the same way. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de