From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4369 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2002 18:05:16 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 20 Jun 2002 18:05:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 13564 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2002 18:05:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 17339 Received: (qmail 13551 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2002 18:05:09 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 11:05:04 -0700 From: Jos Backus To: Clint Adams Cc: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: posix compliance Message-ID: <20020620180526.GA65950@lizzy.catnook.com> Reply-To: jos@catnook.com Mail-Followup-To: Clint Adams , zsh-workers@sunsite.dk References: <20020618225803.GA22361@dman.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020618225803.GA22361@dman.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i A quick report from UseNIX: One thing Jordan Hubbard of Apple mentioned was that our positional parameters ($1, $2, etc.) are assignable whereas they are not in bash (Chet Ramey, who was also present, confirmed this). The bash behavior is apparently what POSIX specifies. This was one of the things which kept Apple from keeping zsh as their /bin/sh, according to him. Personally I thought his defense was rather weak: they tested with 3.0.8 and didn't bother to give the zsh developers any feedback. He also again complained about executable size and footprint (zsh vs. bash), which I think was addressed earlier without them giving us any feedback. Otoh, the next version of OS X will have an updated zsh 4.0.4. -- Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ Santa Clara, CA _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ jos@catnook.com _/_/ _/_/_/ require 'std/disclaimer'