From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-31895-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 15738 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2013 10:01:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 31895
Received: (qmail 12302 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2013 10:01:01 -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: cbfec7f5-b7ef66d00000795a-1f-526a4159bb35
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 11:00:56 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: Shell job structure
Message-id: <20131025110056.1757a5ab@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <131024220214.ZM8256@torch.brasslantern.com>
References:
 <CADv1Z=pM7H4Xg9+GyWd4zw0cv0mXfbJvqip6vc7e_yrXRN=1sg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131005223159.25fea6a0@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
 <131006173621.ZM31831@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20131007102529.5354f342@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <131007074049.ZM32707@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20131008214437.41dc396a@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
 <131024220214.ZM8256@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+NgFuplluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/4Vd1Ix6wgg67pVhYHmx8yOTB6rDr4
	gSmAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoErY9fn+8wFzRwVa9elNzBuZ+ti5OSQEDCRePluCiuELSZx4d56
	oDgXh5DAUkaJre8PMUM4y5kklt/ezAhSxSKgKrG4/RgLiM0mYCgxddNssLiIgLjE2bXnweLC
	AgoSt3ZcAbN5BewlJmy9ywxicwpYSjTfPsYEMfQ7k8Tjff/AzuAX0Je4+vcTE8QZ9hIzr5xh
	hGgWlPgx+R7YIGYBLYnN25pYIWx5ic1r3jJPYBSYhaRsFpKyWUjKFjAyr2IUTS1NLihOSs81
	0itOzC0uzUvXS87P3cQICcKvOxiXHrM6xCjAwajEw5swIzNIiDWxrLgy9xCjBAezkgjvbvus
	ICHelMTKqtSi/Pii0pzU4kOMTBycUg2MW4yWPD4jyvZ0xfLFExaZv5v1t4x/woY7605ken7s
	r41p2qF07qvzw2Lfyadu99/5v1zRr3NLTwNzXG3zwkv6lq1NF6x3RS+O6bZK5472u/PnaS7/
	j3u3SzbOMZ7p0dsruapGcHsSi8Ised/A59FNT+zaVX9ZC9xV3fdPLC9OaqfBJZd3xX29SizF
	GYmGWsxFxYkAPhoH8SACAAA=

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 22:02:14 -0700
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> } The job table would become a list of top-level jobs, while the job
> } structure would have pointers to nested jobs.
> 
> As I mentioned elsewhere, the procs list and "other" pointer into the
> job table serve this function.
> 
> It still might be done more cleanly, but at least we avoided a full
> rewrite for now.

There's a wider problem of what happens inside nested control
structures, in particular functions.  Consider what happens when you use
"pipestatus" inside a function, and then try to apply it to a pipeline,
that happens to run that function at the right hand end, after the whole
pipeline has finished.  Logically, at least, this requires some kind of
hierarchical handling of jobs, not processes --- although simply saving
and restoring the current job might be good enough.  Does the current
system take account of this kind of thing properly?  If so, maybe things
are better than I thought.

pws