From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-35629-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 21527 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2015 16:34:00 -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: 35629
Received: (qmail 25586 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2015 16:33:58 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
	RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
X-Originating-IP: [80.3.228.158]
X-Spam: 0
X-Authority: v=2.1 cv=dtgmcAU4 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=P+FLVI8RzFchTbbqTxIDRw==:117
 a=P+FLVI8RzFchTbbqTxIDRw==:17 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10
 a=BrDiTsk0AAAA:8 a=t2jLlCmb5YYyO1eo_ksA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 17:33:52 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@ntlworld.com>
To: Zsh Hackers' List <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: Typeset with array
Message-ID: <20150627173352.58956453@ntlworld.com>
In-Reply-To: <24943.1435346044@thecus.kiddle.eu>
References: <5578996E.3080700@thequod.de>
	<150610191427.ZM30841@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<5579C247.1060800@thequod.de>
	<150611183639.ZM32247@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<20150612094237.338f79d5@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<20150619123930.2688d9e3@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<7337.1434735386@thecus.kiddle.eu>
	<20150625102923.1dc227ff@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<24943.1435346044@thecus.kiddle.eu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 21:14:04 +0200
Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Sounds fair enough, however, in the case of something like:
>   % typeset -i i=(2+3)*4
>   zsh: no matches found: *4
> it isn't exactly staring you in the face.

Yes, it's being parsed as "i=(2+3)" followed by "*4", just as

i=(2+3)*4

would always have been parsed.

That's always been a bad thing to do, though.  Unquoted parentheses and
* will always lead you astray.  You'd have got away before with
NO_NOMATCH, but relying on that isn't great practice, to say the least.

I could make array asignments without a following space an error,
probably, but as you noted that's breaking cases that used to work, and
I don't like to do it only after typeset.

pws