From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23025 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2009 17:53:31 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 17 Jan 2009 17:53:31 -0000 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at sunsite.dk does not designate permitted sender hosts) Received: (qmail 32204 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2009 17:53:28 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 17 Jan 2009 17:53:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 5931 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2009 17:53:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 26344 Received: (qmail 5915 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2009 17:53:24 -0000 Received: from bifrost.dotsrc.org (130.225.254.106) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 17 Jan 2009 17:53:24 -0000 Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com [81.103.221.48]) by bifrost.dotsrc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EDA180271F0 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:53:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20090117175317.SVYO4080.mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:53:17 +0000 Received: from pws-pc ([81.107.45.176]) by aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id <20090117175317.OBJH22934.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@pws-pc> for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:53:17 +0000 Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:53:12 +0000 From: Peter Stephenson To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: treatment of empty strings - why is this not a bug? Message-ID: <20090117175312.107130d7@pws-pc> In-Reply-To: References: <18796.17298.94642.461735@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <090115201912.ZM20275@torch.brasslantern.com> <090116193527.ZM22429@torch.brasslantern.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.6.1 (GTK+ 2.14.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=b9lWrR2ZfKoA:10 a=7862LJqnZcQA:10 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=8cflkz8CPVhX4G9euscA:9 a=l-58Qch6m4JURkqVdSMA:7 a=I4BxfPn8JsnFnQstLqSZeNMC6Z8A:4 a=LY0hPdMaydYA:10 X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/8873/Sat Jan 17 04:33:31 2009 on bifrost X-Virus-Status: Clean On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 00:31:05 -0500 Greg Klanderman wrote: > >>>>> Bart Schaefer writes: > > > Consider an array populated by using a glob pattern, which is then > > subjected to replacement using $arr:s/pat// or $arr:h or $arr:t. > > You don't know at time of execution what will be matched in by the > > glob, nor necessarily what will be left behind after substitution. > > If the substitution results in an emtpy string, how often do you > > want that to remain in the argument list of whatever action you next > > apply to the contents of the array? > > I do not agree with this reasoning, but I don't think it's worth > continuing to argue about it. It's not just reasoning, it's actually used all over the place for eliminating unwanted matches. It's probably worth getting one think crystal clear: there is absolutely no likelihood of changing basic syntactic defaults, which is a recipe for disaster. So you're right, there's not a lot point arguing. -- Peter Stephenson Web page now at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/p.w.stephenson/