test release

test release

[Richard Coleman]

I've made a test release zsh-2.6-beta9-test2.tar.gz
and put it in the testing directory of the archive.
I've been sorta busy this week so I haven't finished
a lot of the things I want to do before I release the
next beta.  So I want to work on it for another week
or so before I make a real beta release.

Check the ChangeLog for what I've added so far.

rc
zsh@math.gatech.edu

Re: test release

[Mark Borges]

>> Richard Coleman(RC) wrote on Fri, 19 May 1995 05:35:06 -0400:
RC> I've made a test release zsh-2.6-beta9-test2.tar.gz
RC> and put it in the testing directory of the archive.
RC> I've been sorta busy this week so I haven't finished
RC> a lot of the things I want to do before I release the
RC> next beta.  So I want to work on it for another week
RC> or so before I make a real beta release.

Are you going to address the zstrtol/strtol lossage in this beta?
It's responsible for breaking brace and numeric range globbing:

	$ ./zsh -f
	% echo $ZSH_VERSION
	2.6-beta9-test2
	% echo {1..10}
	1..10
	% touch a.1 a.2 a.3
	% echo a.<1-3>
	$ echo $?
	21

In this case, can't we just go back to using zstrtol like in the old days?
At least it works.

  -mb-

intepreting octal and globbing breakage

[Richard Coleman]

> RC> I've made a test release zsh-2.6-beta9-test2.tar.gz
> RC> and put it in the testing directory of the archive.
> RC> I've been sorta busy this week so I haven't finished
> RC> a lot of the things I want to do before I release the
> RC> next beta.  So I want to work on it for another week
> RC> or so before I make a real beta release.
> 
> Are you going to address the zstrtol/strtol lossage in this beta?
> It's responsible for breaking brace and numeric range globbing:

> In this case, can't we just go back to using zstrtol like in the old days?
> At least it works.

That's one of the reasons I just made a test release rather than the
real thing.  I'll probably have to go back using zstrtol.  That would
also make it easy to fix it so that numbers beginning with '0' are not
interpreted as octal.  I sorta hate to do this, since then zstrtol
would be even more incompatible with the standard strtol.  I also hate
the idea of interpreting 0xff has hex, but not interpreting 010 as
octal.  I also hate the idea of adding (yet another) option to control
this.

What does ksh and bash do?  I'm inclined to go with the principle of
least surprise and make this compatible with however the other shells
handle this.

At any rate, I'll try to fix the globbing breakage before I release
beta9.

rc
zsh@math.gatech.edu

Re: intepreting octal and globbing breakage

[Zoltan Hidvegi]

> That's one of the reasons I just made a test release rather than the
> real thing.  I'll probably have to go back using zstrtol.  That would
> also make it easy to fix it so that numbers beginning with '0' are not
> interpreted as octal.  I sorta hate to do this, since then zstrtol
> would be even more incompatible with the standard strtol.  I also hate

Why? It can be compatible with the standard, but we should call it with base
10 from zzlex.

> the idea of interpreting 0xff has hex, but not interpreting 010 as
> octal.  I also hate the idea of adding (yet another) option to control
> this.
> 
> What does ksh and bash do?  I'm inclined to go with the principle of
> least surprise and make this compatible with however the other shells
> handle this.

Bash version 1.14.3 always treat 010 az octal and 0xff as hex in math, and it
segfaults on echo $[09] (at least with Solaris 2.3) :-). ksh ignores leading
zeros. I see that interpreting 0xff as hex but 010 as decimal is not too
elegant, but it does not hurt anyone. The alternative is to give unballanced
stack error on 0xff and if I have to choose I'd choose 0xff to be a hex
number. It can be done in zzlex.

Zoltan