4.0.1 - arguments test fails

4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Andrej Borsenkow]

/tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst: starting.
*** /tmp/zsh.ztst.out.959       Sat Jun  2 02:25:33 2001
--- /tmp/zsh.ztst.tout.959      Sat Jun  2 02:25:33 2001
***************
*** 1,4 ****
   line: {tst -}{}
   MESSAGE:{arg}
- DESCRIPTION:{option}
- NO:{-x}
--- 1,2 ----
Test /tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst failed: output differs 
from expected as shown above for:
  tst_arguments '-x' ':arg:'
  comptest $'tst -\t'
Was testing: argument beginning with minus
/tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst: test failed.
gmake[1]: [check] Error 1 (ignored)
rm -rf Modules .zcompdump
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/u3/u1/build/zsh-4.0.x/Test'

-andrej

Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Peter Stephenson]

> Test /tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst failed: output differs 
> from expected as shown above for:
>   tst_arguments '-x' ':arg:'
>   comptest $'tst -\t'

I knew there was something I'd forgotten before releasing the shell ---
testing it worked.  Oh, well, it'll see if anyone's awake out there.

This is the sort of thing that happens with _arguments and its friends all
the time, it's just that some *other* time would have been better.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk>
Work: pws@csr.com
Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk

Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 2,  1:04am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} This is the sort of thing that happens with _arguments and its friends all
} the time, it's just that some *other* time would have been better.

I backed out 14607 and then all the tests pass.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 2,  1:04am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} I knew there was something I'd forgotten before releasing the shell ---
} testing it worked.  Oh, well, it'll see if anyone's awake out there.

Of course, since you didn't make a release and then immediately leave
town, Sven had to fill the gap by introducing a bug and then leaving town.

We do have a history of making a release and then quickly making another
with only the dates changed (not the version).

Unfortunately I can't tell whether this test failure is an actual bug,
or an intentional change in behavior.  The next test chunk fails as well:

*** /tmp/zsh.ztst.out.28338     Fri Jun  1 20:47:45 2001
--- /tmp/zsh.ztst.tout.28338    Fri Jun  1 20:47:46 2001
***************
*** 1,6 ****
  line: {tst -o }{}
! line: {tst -o }{}
! DESCRIPTION:{optarg}
! NO:{oa}
! DESCRIPTION:{arg1}
! NO:{a1}
--- 1,2 ----
  line: {tst -o }{}
! line: {tst -o oa }{}
Test ../../zsh-4.0/Test/Y03arguments.ztst failed: output differs from expected as shown above for:
 tst_arguments '-o::optarg:(oa)' ':arg1:(a1)'
 comptest $'tst -o\t\t'
Was testing: optional option argument


-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Andrej Borsenkow wrote:

> /tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst: starting.
> *** /tmp/zsh.ztst.out.959       Sat Jun  2 02:25:33 2001
> --- /tmp/zsh.ztst.tout.959      Sat Jun  2 02:25:33 2001
> ***************
> *** 1,4 ****
>    line: {tst -}{}
>    MESSAGE:{arg}
> - DESCRIPTION:{option}
> - NO:{-x}
> --- 1,2 ----
> Test /tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst failed: output differs 
> from expected as shown above for:
>   tst_arguments '-x' ':arg:'
>   comptest $'tst -\t'
> Was testing: argument beginning with minus
> /tools/src/zsh-4.0.x/Test/Y03arguments.ztst: test failed.
> gmake[1]: [check] Error 1 (ignored)
> rm -rf Modules .zcompdump
> gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/u3/u1/build/zsh-4.0.x/Test'

Oh boy, am I ashamed.

The patch makes the test suite happy again and also fixes Peter's
problem with history/fc.  It looks big, but that's mostly re-indentation.

There were basically two problems: in the test suite, my bad patch kept
multiple actions from being tried -- the test to keep it from trying the
same action more than once was placed wrongly -- and if we haven't an
option on the command line, we should try to complete options, even if
we've already tried an action.

Oh boy, am I ashamed.

I'm going to commit this now, do I have to commit it somewhere else, too
(because of branching or something)?


I'm soo ashamed.  I'll better creep back into my hole in the ground now...


Bye
  Sven

Index: Completion/Base/Utility/_arguments
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Completion/Base/Utility/_arguments,v
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -r1.7 _arguments
--- Completion/Base/Utility/_arguments	2001/06/01 14:29:11	1.7
+++ Completion/Base/Utility/_arguments	2001/06/06 09:17:26
@@ -186,6 +186,8 @@
   esac
 done
 
+[[ "$PREFIX" = [-+] ]] && alwopt=arg
+
 zstyle -s ":completion:${curcontext}:options" auto-description autod
 
 if (( $# )) && comparguments -i "$autod" "$singopt[@]" "$@"; then
@@ -227,106 +229,108 @@
   while true; do
     while _tags; do
       anum=1
-      while [[ anum -le  $#descrs ]]; do
-
-	action="$actions[anum]"
-	descr="$descrs[anum]"
-	subc="$subcs[anum++]"
+      if [[ -z "$tried" ]]; then
+        while [[ anum -le  $#descrs ]]; do
 
-        if [[ -z "$tried" ]] && { [[ -n "$matched" ]] || _requested "$subc" }; then
+	  action="$actions[anum]"
+	  descr="$descrs[anum]"
+	  subc="$subcs[anum++]"
 
-          curcontext="${oldcontext%:*}:$subc"
+          if [[ -n "$matched" ]] || _requested "$subc"; then
 
-          _description "$subc" expl "$descr"
+            curcontext="${oldcontext%:*}:$subc"
 
-          if [[ "$action" = \=\ * ]]; then
-            action="$action[3,-1]"
-            words=( "$subc" "$words[@]" )
-	    (( CURRENT++ ))
-          fi
+            _description "$subc" expl "$descr"
 
-          if [[ "$action" = -\>* ]]; then
-	    action="${${action[3,-1]##[ 	]#}%%[ 	]#}"
-	    if (( ! $state[(I)$action] )); then
-              comparguments -W line opt_args
-              state=( "$state[@]" "$action" )
-	      if [[ -n "$usecc" ]]; then
-	        curcontext="${oldcontext%:*}:$subc"
-	      else
-	        context=( "$context[@]" "$subc" )
-	      fi
-              compstate[restore]=''
-              aret=yes
+            if [[ "$action" = \=\ * ]]; then
+              action="$action[3,-1]"
+              words=( "$subc" "$words[@]" )
+	      (( CURRENT++ ))
             fi
-          else
-            if [[ -z "$local" ]]; then
-              local line
-              typeset -A opt_args
-              local=yes
-            fi
 
-            comparguments -W line opt_args
+            if [[ "$action" = -\>* ]]; then
+	      action="${${action[3,-1]##[ 	]#}%%[ 	]#}"
+	      if (( ! $state[(I)$action] )); then
+                comparguments -W line opt_args
+                state=( "$state[@]" "$action" )
+	        if [[ -n "$usecc" ]]; then
+	          curcontext="${oldcontext%:*}:$subc"
+	        else
+	          context=( "$context[@]" "$subc" )
+	        fi
+                compstate[restore]=''
+                aret=yes
+              fi
+            else
+              if [[ -z "$local" ]]; then
+                local line
+                typeset -A opt_args
+                local=yes
+              fi
 
-            if [[ "$action" = \ # ]]; then
+              comparguments -W line opt_args
 
-              # An empty action means that we should just display a message.
+              if [[ "$action" = \ # ]]; then
 
-	      _message "$descr"
-	      mesg=yes
-	      tried=yes
+                # An empty action means that we should just display a message.
 
-            elif [[ "$action" = \(\(*\)\) ]]; then
+	        _message "$descr"
+	        mesg=yes
+	        tried=yes
+                alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+              elif [[ "$action" = \(\(*\)\) ]]; then
 
-              # ((...)) contains literal strings with descriptions.
+                # ((...)) contains literal strings with descriptions.
 
-              eval ws\=\( "${action[3,-3]}" \)
+                eval ws\=\( "${action[3,-3]}" \)
 
-              _describe -t "$subc" "$descr" ws -M "$matcher" "$subopts[@]" ||
-                  alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
-	      tried=yes
+                _describe -t "$subc" "$descr" ws -M "$matcher" "$subopts[@]" ||
+                    alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+	        tried=yes
 
-            elif [[ "$action" = \(*\) ]]; then
+              elif [[ "$action" = \(*\) ]]; then
 
-              # Anything inside `(...)' is added directly.
+                # Anything inside `(...)' is added directly.
 
-              eval ws\=\( "${action[2,-2]}" \)
+                eval ws\=\( "${action[2,-2]}" \)
 
-              _all_labels "$subc" expl "$descr" compadd "$subopts[@]" -a - ws ||
-                  alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
-	      tried=yes
-            elif [[ "$action" = \{*\} ]]; then
+                _all_labels "$subc" expl "$descr" compadd "$subopts[@]" -a - ws ||
+                    alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+	        tried=yes
+              elif [[ "$action" = \{*\} ]]; then
 
-              # A string in braces is evaluated.
+                # A string in braces is evaluated.
 
-              while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
-                eval "$action[2,-2]" && ret=0
-              done
-              (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
-	      tried=yes
-            elif [[ "$action" = \ * ]]; then
+                while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
+                  eval "$action[2,-2]" && ret=0
+                done
+                (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+	        tried=yes
+              elif [[ "$action" = \ * ]]; then
 
-              # If the action starts with a space, we just call it.
+                # If the action starts with a space, we just call it.
 
-	      eval "action=( $action )"
-              while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
-                "$action[@]" && ret=0
-              done
-              (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
-	      tried=yes
-            else
+	        eval "action=( $action )"
+                while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
+                  "$action[@]" && ret=0
+                done
+                (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+	        tried=yes
+              else
 
-              # Otherwise we call it with the description-arguments.
+                # Otherwise we call it with the description-arguments.
 
-	      eval "action=( $action )"
-              while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
-                "$action[1]" "$subopts[@]" "$expl[@]" "${(@)action[2,-1]}" && ret=0
-	      done
-              (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
-	      tried=yes
+	        eval "action=( $action )"
+                while _next_label "$subc" expl "$descr"; do
+                  "$action[1]" "$subopts[@]" "$expl[@]" "${(@)action[2,-1]}" && ret=0
+	        done
+                (( ret )) && alwopt=${alwopt:-yes}
+	        tried=yes
+              fi
             fi
           fi
-        fi
-      done
+        done
+      fi
       if [[ -z "$hasopts" &&
             -z "$matched" &&
             ( -z "$tried" || -n "$alwopt" ) &&

-- 
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de

Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Peter Stephenson]

Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> I'm going to commit this now, do I have to commit it somewhere else, too
> (because of branching or something)?

Yes, you have to
  cvs -d '<the-sourceforge-stuff>' checkout -r zsh-4_0-patches zsh
and apply it.

In general they shouldn't go straight onto the 4.0 branch until after a bit
of testing, but this one is presumably an improvement.  Bart's suggestion
is someone (probably me, it looks like) applies all the 4.0 changes, but
I'm not enthusiastic about doing it all myself at the moment.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Unit 300, Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0XL, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 392070


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.  
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************

Branch patches (Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails)

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 6, 10:51am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
}
} In general they shouldn't go straight onto the 4.0 branch until after a bit
} of testing, but this one is presumably an improvement.  Bart's suggestion
} is someone (probably me, it looks like) applies all the 4.0 changes, but
} I'm not enthusiastic about doing it all myself at the moment.

Actually my suggestion would be that someone (probably you, but we could
divide up responsibility, e.g., could be Sven for the completion system)
give an "OK, go ahead" before patches were merged from development to
stable -- but that doesn't mean it's essential that the "moderator" do
the actual patching.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Peter Stephenson wrote:

> Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> > I'm going to commit this now, do I have to commit it somewhere else, too
> > (because of branching or something)?
> 
> Yes, you have to
>   cvs -d '<the-sourceforge-stuff>' checkout -r zsh-4_0-patches zsh
> and apply it.

Aha.  I have that now, but whenever I try to commit the applied patches
there, it says:

  cvs commit: Examining ...
  ...
  cvs [server aborted]: "commit" requires write access to the repository

What am I doing wrong?

> In general they shouldn't go straight onto the 4.0 branch until after a bit
> of testing, but this one is presumably an improvement.  Bart's suggestion
> is someone (probably me, it looks like) applies all the 4.0 changes, but
> I'm not enthusiastic about doing it all myself at the moment.

Bart's 14744 would be fine with me (when I've learned how to commit there...).


Bye
  Sven


-- 
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de

Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 6, 12:51pm, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails
}
} > Yes, you have to
} >   cvs -d '<the-sourceforge-stuff>' checkout -r zsh-4_0-patches zsh
} > and apply it.
} 
}   cvs [server aborted]: "commit" requires write access to the repository
} 
} What am I doing wrong?

Probably you checked out a copy using the cvs pserver.  You need to use
the ssh flavor of <the-sourceforge-stuff>:

CVS_RSH=ssh cvs -d 'wischnow@cvs.zsh.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/zsh' ...

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> On Jun 6, 12:51pm, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> } Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails
> }
> } > Yes, you have to
> } >   cvs -d '<the-sourceforge-stuff>' checkout -r zsh-4_0-patches zsh
> } > and apply it.
> } 
> }   cvs [server aborted]: "commit" requires write access to the repository
> } 
> } What am I doing wrong?
> 
> Probably you checked out a copy using the cvs pserver.  You need to use
> the ssh flavor of <the-sourceforge-stuff>:
> 
> CVS_RSH=ssh cvs -d 'wischnow@cvs.zsh.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/zsh' ...

Ouch, yes, of course.  Thanks (also to Andrej...).


Bye
  Sven


-- 
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de

RE: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1 - arguments test fails

[Andrej Borsenkow]

> Aha.  I have that now, but whenever I try to commit the applied patches
> there, it says:
> 
>   cvs commit: Examining ...
>   ...
>   cvs [server aborted]: "commit" requires write access to the repository
> 
> What am I doing wrong?
> 

Probably you've checked this out as anonymous? What is in CVS/Root?

-andrej