From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27805 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2013 15:56:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 31843 Received: (qmail 7167 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2013 15:56:17 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-AuditID: cbfec7f4-b7f0a6d000007b1b-fe-52615a1f5cb2 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:56:14 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson To: Bart Schaefer , zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: zsh syntax check fails on correct if [[ usage (rhbz 966911) Message-id: <20131018165614.48f399b7@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> In-reply-to: <131018084831.ZM8783@torch.brasslantern.com> References: <52613F82.1000009@redhat.com> <131018084831.ZM8783@torch.brasslantern.com> Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xa7ryUYlBBs9nG1rsn/6QxeJg80Mm ByaP+6umsHqsOviBKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugSvj9j3WgjcsFSvbLjE1MD5n7mLk5JAQMJHY NGUqE4QtJnHh3nq2LkYuDiGBpYwSP48vYodw+pkkjizZzQZSxSKgKnHs+3WwDjYBQ4mpm2Yz gtgiAk4SjR8egMWFBTwkPs96yApi8wrYSzxu3QwW5xSwlLj2ahoLiC0kECFx4cILsCv4BfQl rv79BHWFvcTMK2cYIXoFJX5MvgdWzyygJbF5WxMrhC0vsXnNW+YJjAKzkJTNQlI2C0nZAkbm VYyiqaXJBcVJ6bmGesWJucWleel6yfm5mxghYfllB+PiY1aHGAU4GJV4eB/YJQYJsSaWFVfm HmKU4GBWEuEtcwYK8aYkVlalFuXHF5XmpBYfYmTi4JRqYGw5oBr57bWMukHr77UBXwv2GJzM 3ae1xrVEPmtT7fRvrb+EzxoarF1w4+sUpdf7867sYE6YknDz4NG8wtT++JhNDo0tf37M60o3 /X3lfvANp0ly5k4W+SsO34+dKPrzh4JqapK01qZtTO/9Y9beP7Vh1qpZSd82PFOyq/nGbbDU 2C/gzf50lflKLMUZiYZazEXFiQDF78SmKQIAAA== On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:48:31 -0700 Bart Schaefer wrote: > If you run the test as > > zsh -vxn /tmp/test.zsh > > it becomes clear that zsh is actually executing some of the commands, > and then returning the exit status of those commands rather than of > the syntax check itself. It's certainly forking, and I think it's peforming the assignments, and it seems to perform the test. The problem here is we don't actually have a syntax checking mode, we just have a mode that tries to execute as little as possible. As little as possible isn't a very clear target. pws