From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-39629-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 12931 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2016 13:46:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 39629
Received: (qmail 7974 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2016 13:46:45 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-qt0-f179.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from <schaefer@brasslantern.com>, uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 
 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1.  
 Clear:RC:0(209.85.216.179):SA:0(0.0/5.0):. 
 Processed in 0.739371 secs); 13 Oct 2016 13:46:45 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=T_DKIM_INVALID
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-Envelope-From: schaefer@brasslantern.com
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: |
X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: |
Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at brasslantern.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=brasslantern-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
        bh=WA1k+4zUgGuUNhUbNpTlGDA+0WDH+hnhl60EbTqQiP8=;
        b=iFrn3krb2VT7ThEISrW9jScjlqZPhFrjTF8rrah9w/ld26MewhUpnEbHbV0DPkt5Px
         pV9ngiOznt8Wyflud2hPwPCnv5rNEQfPBDGkUySLMVD/Z3k+pX76XU0aF7Dp1flNMca5
         1VH8IuFWuCV29aDCSeEvVG7fkrvbukG/6rbfrTi7XFOHqGBkmv4CgRbOFMQAXFHB2ent
         Oa5WxSwzf5nPZzGBWNE9kZwXuKtOaAcWOlXQx3xzqslw+S7cO5zU8QO6BNVElcoyK0eK
         tsOKFDWk02Sp9sXLfUNSBCFyGhbexgEuHmzkKUjM1QzHZdiUyYzQv9Kg8hMuXgSgNK+/
         rMsg==
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:from:date
         :message-id:subject:to;
        bh=WA1k+4zUgGuUNhUbNpTlGDA+0WDH+hnhl60EbTqQiP8=;
        b=cZ3fXSZsIjFENpQ8rZyQPtX3tjdHxmU8vMxRN+/KNiU/CeHEi2XPsTq29eT3k8J0cT
         TETtxILqO9znd5OKn65pXjL164e3xf/BUvXFEWLlrE/SX0lOTjujsFH/2n7j7D/Kniq9
         GPG8dvKYOBwzdbHAIH3iwtUt6e2nxdiHVfeTLntaKiJgloFnavejT6MTLatbd+n/pxrp
         ruSHM8qywgSI8ebBfRSMVibcyK35PnA3xBmvDwvTbmb/Fah5DMuPcMMN7BrMKw+r7Ox5
         DN5JtER+FozFTNFqaJCa0wbGbjTTjbg/xHiTcxX6ySrqFa1VSJd6ps5H2MCh2ieaPfXy
         ePJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RnA6m8VWm5fQJkxNB0LeKFrUr5GVheVU8C7XUyDXzP/UdJAt2SETo2bl2+xVBUuhH6/DoR/1e63Hyi6qg==
X-Received: by 10.237.36.28 with SMTP id r28mr5897714qtc.99.1476366398425;
 Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161013112251.329c0dbf@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
References: <CAKc7PVBEjPJMtV59CrN6LmrDaoGqfa_DZqwo3Y9HK=+0od7ycA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKc7PVCAR2yTJGgdBbvTp=mBC0ZrXcVWW0DE_U26TezSTNdd=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKc7PVB=485r3nRz_pP3A-k-oq2pOp5qYUK7pE1VEApXb0pR1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKc7PVDof_GEuoSv7pg8c1=spXfDkWopP5VR8dVHg-bxXVES1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKc7PVCRtBBVONgiExopYYUv7x4-HN_QEYk-05aoqZihiCRgMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH+w=7a7jc0Q2=M9aG5mttbazxfsHB-Cz=WwJzCvz_SdnbApRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CGME20161011065321eucas1p22afaabbe1f17f26a1b3507619ed1d96f@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20161011065105.GB16819@fujitsu.shahaf.local2> <20161013112251.329c0dbf@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:46:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH+w=7ZArSYVkjcrbAmkeiWsmpiufbj9+DeNhORgKtYEXEkn7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: type-checking for metafiedness? (was: Re: Cores almost on demand
 in patcompile())
To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Peter Stephenson
<p.stephenson@samsung.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 06:51:05 +0000
> Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> Pardon me if this has been discussed before, but why don't we introduce
>> the type definitions
>> and start incrementally replacing uses of "char *" with uses of these
>> types?
>
> This probably is a good idea, although the intermediate state where this
> has been only partly done is likely to be a bit of a mess.

I'd expect to encounter a lot of problems with (char **) arrays where
every element of the array is (or not) metafied.  (Hopefully there
aren't any that are mixed).  As was noted in the discussion of passing
around lengths of arrays when manipulating array parameters, the older
code makes a lot of assumptions about pointer arithmetic and s[1][1]
subscripting and so on.