Re: The "set" utility outputs binary data

[Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>]

On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 15:08:44 -0800
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> On Dec 4,  9:56pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> }
> } This seems to be going the right way; let me know of any oddities or
> } unwanted side effects.  Note a few "nice" representations have changed
> } to fit $'..' conventions.
> 
> I'll withhold judgment on whether I like this, though I must say I do
> prefer "^C" to "\C-c".

If this is important enough, we can arrange two versions of nicechar /
wcs_nicechar.  The quickest change would be expanding the functions under
different names to take a flag when passed from mb_niceformat(),
together with a shim layer for other cases.

(You can't seriously be complaining that "typeset -m IFS" now outputs

IFS=$' \t\n\C-@'

instead of raw binary, can you?)

> In any case though, this has borked two of the test scripts:

Not sure what I can have been testing.

pws

diff --git a/Test/D04parameter.ztst b/Test/D04parameter.ztst
index a3c5d71..2b46e06 100644
--- a/Test/D04parameter.ztst
+++ b/Test/D04parameter.ztst
@@ -396,9 +396,9 @@
 >Instead Here I Am Stuck By The Computer
 
   foo=$'\x7f\x00'
-  print ${(V)foo}
+  print -r -- ${(V)foo}
 0:${(V)...}
->^?^@
+>\C-?\C-@
 
   foo='playing '\''stupid'\'' "games" \w\i\t\h $quoting.'
   print -r ${(q)foo}
diff --git a/Test/V09datetime.ztst b/Test/V09datetime.ztst
index 63ff4ee..831421d 100644
--- a/Test/V09datetime.ztst
+++ b/Test/V09datetime.ztst
@@ -69,6 +69,6 @@
 >090
 >1
 
-  print ${(V)"$(strftime $'%Y\0%m\0%d' 100000000)"}
+  print -r -- ${(V)"$(strftime $'%Y\0%m\0%d' 100000000)"}
 0:Embedded nulls
->1973^@03^@03
+>1973\C-@03\C-@03