From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24648 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2004 17:34:25 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Sep 2004 17:34:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 74509 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2004 17:34:17 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 5 Sep 2004 17:34:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 20621 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2004 17:34:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 20319 Received: (qmail 20607 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2004 17:34:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 5 Sep 2004 17:34:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 73591 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2004 17:33:04 -0000 Received: from cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk (195.92.193.19) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 5 Sep 2004 17:33:02 -0000 Received: from modem-144.keyhole-angel.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.34.144] helo=pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk) by cmailm3.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1C40sv-0007wL-4V for zsh-workers@sunsite.dk; Sun, 05 Sep 2004 18:33:01 +0100 Received: by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 501) id A29CB8634; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 13:36:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8156B85AF for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 18:36:28 +0100 (BST) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: Test Failures from latest CVS In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of "Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:38:26 PDT." Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 18:36:27 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Message-Id: <20040905173628.A29CB8634@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=6.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Hits: 1.5 Bart Schaefer wrote: > The scriptname has to be changed before the string to be eval'd is parsed. > Peter tried (or so I presume) to fix a long-standing bug that scriptname > would not be restored properly on a parse error, by delaying the change > rather than by explicitly restoring; but also neglected to restore ineval > to its previous state in the same circumstance. Thanks, that looks better. > (Is there a reason not to > assign lastval in that case also? It could simplify the code structure.) I don't think there's a reason *not* to; it's just not necessary because in any case on return from bin_eval it gets set to the 1 we just returned. -- Peter Stephenson Work: pws@csr.com Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk