From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-38272-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 25865 invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2016 11:17:31 -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: 38272
Received: (qmail 25544 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2016 11:17:28 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-AuditID: cbfec7f4-f796c6d000001486-a5-570b8567dc0d
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:07:16 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: zsh workers <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: Allow slash in alternation patterns in limited cases?
Message-id: <20160411120716.06a6d1c9@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to:
 <CAHYJk3QkC_jDq94ax2vMZUCaU2iELFO7kk49ogQUg-qafDtgPA@mail.gmail.com>
References:
 <CAHYJk3TY5kU0fXDkk2iO7kRJhhMTS1f4a9Am1ueN4wCXOQ7Hsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <160410151105.ZM21544@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20160411093738.11406966@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <CAHYJk3SEeghkbpLCE26bG_76nM5PYp9MF68AO1ue00DHTwRV6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160411112941.579d8157@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <CAHYJk3QkC_jDq94ax2vMZUCaU2iELFO7kk49ogQUg-qafDtgPA@mail.gmail.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+NgFrrILMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xK7rprdzhBnsPs1kcbH7I5MDoserg
	B6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujJkLnjAV/GepmD/jNWMDYwNLFyMnh4SAiUT7p5dsELaYxIV7
	68FsIYGljBK3ZpR0MXIB2TOYJDavXsYM4ZxjlJix/DI7hHOWUeLk+f/sIC0sAqoS806/ABvL
	JmAoMXXTbEYQWwQo3vz9H1hcWMBJ4tXDs2AreAXsJZ49WcAKYnMKBEt82rqQBWLoHyaJA6vb
	wRL8AvoSV/9+YoK4z15i5pUzjBDNghI/Jt8DG8osoCWxeVsTK4QtL7F5zVtmiB/UJW7c3c0+
	gVF4FpKWWUhaZiFpWcDIvIpRNLU0uaA4KT3XUK84Mbe4NC9dLzk/dxMjJKC/7GBcfMzqEKMA
	B6MSD6/DNa5wIdbEsuLK3EOMEhzMSiK8f6u5w4V4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8xSnOwKInzzt31
	PkRIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgmy8TBKdXAWM/NEHn03bKgLce/54bHSLELSs9eOst702KFePljN7oS
	OjuCxX57mzIslZstuOVtd8Nem4CODAbj2qjwLIFX5x/d+RZ3NO2G49mD1eqBhTH24uWHDHyk
	s+6t6WOTcuSqmdgyM7GpfuW9jZttXrhZ1n2/++vq9EP/71z6rrO7IvJh3K4NAs9ZlViKMxIN
	tZiLihMB1PtYaWQCAAA=

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:47:21 +0200
Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I misunderstood your original point. I thought you meant making
> (foo/bar|baz/bong) work in a glob would make it more incompatible with
> pattern matching, but it already works there.

The point is that, unlike the ~ case which is just a flag passed in to
the pattern match parser, it would longer done by pattern matching at
all.  It would be done in the glob code.  The pattern match code would
see the foo, bar, baz, bong, and it would it be reassembled higher up.
So it's not so much incompatible as something utterly different.

pws