From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9179 invoked from network); 18 Oct 1999 11:12:19 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 18 Oct 1999 11:12:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 6754 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 1999 11:12:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 8321 Received: (qmail 6747 invoked from network); 18 Oct 1999 11:12:03 -0000 Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 13:12:02 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199910181112.NAA27445@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: Sven Wischnowsky's message of Mon, 18 Oct 1999 11:53:06 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: Associative array ordering and selective unset (Re: Example function) I wrote: > This does that. The patterns are only compiled on demand and the > testing is quite simple, so even in the used-only-once-in-an-init- > script-case it shouldn't make things slower. Oh my... I thought I had tested that with xtrace. Bye Sven diff -u -r oldsrc/cond.c Src/cond.c --- oldsrc/cond.c Mon Oct 18 11:53:58 1999 +++ Src/cond.c Mon Oct 18 12:47:46 1999 @@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ if (c->type < COND_MOD) { char *rt = (char *) right; if (c->type == COND_STREQ || c->type == COND_STRNEQ) { - rt = dupstring(rt); + rt = dupstring(c->right); + singsub(&rt); untokenize(rt); } fprintf(stderr, " %s %s %s", (char *)left, condstr[c->type], -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de