From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: _dispatch (was Re: PATCH: [for consideration] TMPSUFFIX)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:03:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160930070347.GC23665@fujitsu.shahaf.local2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <160929003047.ZM27818@torch.brasslantern.com>
Bart Schaefer wrote on Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 00:30:47 -0700:
> On Sep 29, 6:39am, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> }
> } It might be easier to just give a flag to eval that means "propagate
> } errflag of the evaluated expression to the calling scope"? So the eval
> } itself would be aborted/unrolled, too.
>
> I don't think this is a significant enough problem to warrant changing
> the definition of "eval" (if by "give a flag" you mean "add a -e option"
> for some variant of -e).
>
Yes, that's what I meant. In terms if your idea, I think my idea was to
have ERRFLAG_EVAL automatically convert back to ERRFLAG_ERROR iff -e was
passed to eval — i.e., not by default.
> However, if it were possible for the "eval" builtin to know when it
> was inside an "always" construct and propagate a new ERRFLAG_EVAL
> out to where TRY_BLOCK_ERROR could reflect it, that might work.
> The important bit would be that ERRFLAG_EVAL never converts directly
> back into ERRFLAG_ERROR, so if the script ignores TRY_BLOCK_ERROR
> then all errors disappear at the end of the always-block.
>
> Or something like that.
This makes sense, but wouldn't it also require some way for the always
block to (manually) set ERRFLAG_ERROR again upon an ERRFLAG_EVAL, in
order to "abort enough code" (which was the original issue)?
The interface could be a new builtin, or a setfn on TRY_BLOCK_ERROR; the
important thing is that then the always block finishes ERRFLAG_ERROR
would be set.
Cheers,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-30 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-25 22:51 PATCH: [for consideration] TMPSUFFIX Bart Schaefer
2016-09-26 7:25 ` Daniel Shahaf
2016-09-26 16:19 ` Bart Schaefer
2016-09-27 7:00 ` Daniel Shahaf
2016-09-27 19:20 ` Bart Schaefer
2016-09-28 10:24 ` Daniel Shahaf
2016-09-28 18:49 ` _dispatch (was Re: PATCH: [for consideration] TMPSUFFIX) Bart Schaefer
2016-09-29 6:39 ` Daniel Shahaf
2016-09-29 7:30 ` Bart Schaefer
2016-09-30 7:03 ` Daniel Shahaf [this message]
2016-09-30 21:53 ` Bart Schaefer
2016-09-28 6:09 ` PATCH: [for consideration] TMPSUFFIX Sebastian Gniazdowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160930070347.GC23665@fujitsu.shahaf.local2 \
--to=d.s@daniel.shahaf.name \
--cc=zsh-workers@zsh.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).