From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3655 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2015 20:30:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 34440 Received: (qmail 29074 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2015 20:30:32 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=WdWa1xQDmpRmt7wZAVs4zmrXIx1uJjEZgrnU/UhYu00=; b=aFjiYnpXSZWwu8ouzAmuB7Y0tNmqHGpniK/sDCXVbHnqaQpt2zkYlQMRfy/Np6OyFj dpHKGRWca69uQvNVZIOdqp4mSdan1N3ubgmkhwGKHnbJSSe0ObkVh70AEk8wRduCAYGm 50gx6s7T1FW9HlcNwYgU8G+9DxSAlRkKchN8mAKqwWLWb2m/xBHftMNdvw8O+vSXQU/N LuI6rybhGFE5v4AtCJelRqj1rEmYeFHt6OBr1mZFBj3G8VIq3d6bjtFbKCj/r777EJbQ 122DXKbzRGbDTK099Iq/QBJdMdGnbMHgVWRYZecrnZmBquw4tX437+GuWxB1mehTuc/y Amdg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmTe4y8FQeFBDf45nNvtE6cxUUj26eG72xqLjytwPtXGzAr53Az0ahW5k9vSDxHPfTYQk6S MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.75.199 with SMTP id e7mr789400wiw.21.1422648184863; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:03:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20150130195635.1845793e@ntlworld.com> References: <150122211942.ZM28918@torch.brasslantern.com> <20150129204658.4a800bcb@ntlworld.com> <150129140625.ZM14730@torch.brasslantern.com> <20150130085949.4d44007d@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20150130195635.1845793e@ntlworld.com> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:03:04 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Anyone want to help make zsh/db/gdbm work? From: Bart Schaefer To: Peter Stephenson Cc: Zsh hackers list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04389577b31325050de4172f --f46d04389577b31325050de4172f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Jan 30, 2015 11:57 AM, "Peter Stephenson" wrote: > > > It should probably unset the variable; any other attempt to reuse a > > variable declared local (e.g. by declaring it local as a scalar and > > assigning it as an array) will silently do that, so I don't see why this > > should be different. > > I wonder if this is good enough. It's actually overkill, it's good enough to simply call unsetparam(pmname) before the createspecialhash(). If you're actually going to look up the parameter first, you should also delay the gdbm_open() until you've verified the parameter. --f46d04389577b31325050de4172f--