From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-33664-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 6966 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2014 10:04:39 -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: 33664
Received: (qmail 29638 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2014 10:04:36 -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-b7f6c6d00000120b-a0-54608dae9585
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:04:29 +0000
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: Zsh Hackers' List <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: 'whence' question
Message-id: <20141110100429.7f9103b4@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <141108135508.ZM32372@torch.brasslantern.com>
References: <545A6D66.3080500@eastlink.ca> <1458.1415209763@thecus.kiddle.eu>
 <20141105180035.22f6e9b1@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <141105204330.ZM2973@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20141106211017.11b8848a@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
 <CAH+w=7ZwAdoO7XzU6_j60f9+i-ft5t-d2st98i-ew2fEmQxDzw@mail.gmail.com>
 <141108135508.ZM32372@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+NgFuphluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/4Fd11vQkhBuueqVgcbH7I5MDoserg
	B6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujFtXZ7AUvGatOLyiroHxFEsXIyeHhICJxJrWE6wQtpjEhXvr
	2boYuTiEBJYySrR+vgXlLGeSeHjhJyNIFYuAqsSP3mlgNpuAocTUTbOBbA4OEQFtifaPYiBh
	YQE5if/zjrOB2LwC9hLbH65nBrE5Bawkuna+ZISYeZNJ4ube9WBz+AX0Ja7+/cQEcYW9xMwr
	ZxghmgUlfky+B3Yps4CWxOZtTawQtrzE5jVvmScwCsxCUjYLSdksJGULGJlXMYqmliYXFCel
	5xrqFSfmFpfmpesl5+duYoSE4JcdjIuPWR1iFOBgVOLh9fgSHyLEmlhWXJl7iFGCg1lJhLe6
	JSFEiDclsbIqtSg/vqg0J7X4ECMTB6dUA6OlIv9dV8l0hls8xwM3nHUONfM+YaExe4byrsi5
	oSfX7+1clGd0uKewb/27WT8vnRH3vlkkYF1wxjbLxOzke7UVAcVJEpMfCX/sOOolbC6slbWl
	tmrfi/QXLVP/N3/l2H34p3WS5EHuk+6yV+vP7z3lcub1nJ2LrqaecX6vx60/hymtesf8DbZK
	LMUZiYZazEXFiQAeWkg9HwIAAA==

On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 13:55:08 -0800
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6,  1:58pm, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> }
> } Yes, we want something LIKE that, but simply calling zputs() doesn't
> } handle either the -v or the -s options, and it seems a shame to
> } duplicate all that code from the existing "if (all)" loop later in the
> } function.
> 
> This is what I was thinking when I asked about ${(k)commands[(I)pat]}.
> I wish there were a better way to make fetchcmdnamnode a closure, but
> what you C is what you get ...

I'm not that much bothered what the code looks like, the question seems
to be more what the result should be consistent with.  If you've worked
that you can decide what needs doing.

pws