From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2553 invoked from network); 11 Dec 1998 09:04:41 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 11 Dec 1998 09:04:41 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA03609; Fri, 11 Dec 1998 04:03:14 -0500 (EST) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 04:03:14 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <9812110846.AA36541@ibmth.df.unipi.it> To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Subject: Re: PATCH: wrapper functions in modules In-Reply-To: "Phil Pennock"'s message of "Fri, 11 Dec 1998 06:59:50 NFT." <19981211065950.12315@athenaeum.demon.co.uk> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:46:47 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Resent-Message-ID: <"zQBpb.0.Ku.I_DSs"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4747 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Phil Pennock wrote: > Environment? > Since MODULE_PATH is only used by zsh and any zsh normall uses .zshenv, > it can be set there. Why pollute the environment needlessly. The point is if something else needs it in the environment, you don't have a choice and it's going to clash with the zsh internals anyway. I'm not currently aware of anything else. > How about a convention that any special variables, and perhaps commands, > defined by a module should start with that module's name, and a leading > Z or z if the module name doesn't start with a z? On the whole, that's probably a good idea, but I'm not convinced wholesale rewriting of existing modules is necessary. It depends how generic a module is. Even starting things with 'Z' isn't necessarily enough. -- Peter Stephenson Tel: +39 050 844536 WWW: http://www.ifh.de/~pws/ Dipartimento di Fisica, Via Buonarroti 2, 56127 Pisa, Italy