From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9187 invoked from network); 25 May 1998 02:25:10 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 25 May 1998 02:25:10 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA25616; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:16:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <980524191600.ZM10165@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 19:16:00 -0700 In-Reply-To: <199805241738.MAA25692@hzoli.home> Comments: In reply to Zoltan Hidvegi "Re: PWD parameter" (May 24, 12:38pm) References: <199805241738.MAA25692@hzoli.home> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.820 20aug96) To: Zoltan Hidvegi , zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Subject: Re: PWD parameter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"qe6092.0.BG6.gHDQr"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3996 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu On May 24, 12:38pm, Zoltan Hidvegi wrote: } Subject: Re: PWD parameter } } Note that PWD can be unset even without my patch after typeset +r PWD. Hmm, and it doesn't become set again upon "cd". That, at least, I'd say is (was) a bug, though I suppose it might be useful in some rare cases. } And right now you can unset any writable special parameters. I don't really have a problem with that, in the general case. } It is always good to reduce the number of special parameters, since they } are more complicated to handle in various places I'd definitely agree that we shouldn't be *increasing* the number of special paramters. Do the ones that are already there very often need handling that they don't already get? } and sometimes special } parameters behave differently from non-special parameters. Chuckle. Well, yes; I imagine that's why they're called "special". } Looks like you'd like to ignore any changes to PWD, or at least when you } assign it you'd like to check that the assigned value is correct. The latter, but I wouldn't go so far in defining "correct" as to require that `cd $PWD` and `cd ~+` put you in the same place -- just that both ought to succeed. This is probably wandering farther into philosophy than it's worth .... } This is exacly how zsh behaves after typeset +r PWD. Not quite. For example, my $HOME is /home/schaefer, but that's really a symlink to /extra/home/schaefer. In zsh 3.0.5, if I do cd $HOME typeset +r PWD unset PWD PWD=/extra/home/schaefer echo $PWD then what I get back is /home/schaefer. *That* seems a bit odd. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com