From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20931 invoked by alias); 6 Jun 2014 21:09:00 -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: 32729 Received: (qmail 22144 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2014 21:08:58 -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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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:content-type; bh=mHBBVtgQLTR5872R7tM1tzFW2yubvPbyCSuk/09kWdg=; b=mfzu7n9Hekx0Wm3CehZkAUSucI6mRztqy2QaSzGWW79D5JBkr/CmBi6QsNvFOd1tGC 5GPcfjFY+sUOE6xAmtRdF1jZwV73JJqKg5xWGz7VKKwjc+k7yqHefnG32j3+cFApZicd vFF/XE3uoC4aphCXOWNyQAvds1GbvoEuEjHhy9f+2JDyjCfyPA207yFrSPj5HfC36sk2 FK/PdKaCmxMWqvg0HKViU7S7r6RlHfjPu3ICchah3JBNUSY/R8Bwn/sCsjuM3/YEQ7Ri pdiypU0g5wo/8gY/S/dI6XSJ7zCX56jmIPVHAxIWaG+Z0bL94zOWk1ZXb/Da/IJgPAnt cpDg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnBrqdV5LDX6cIJ2CW0gidljeYtMDW7vWG4P0xrWRxUpD/YweSO8HQ6xcjp3uIRT/CQ9HYs MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.27.198 with SMTP id j6mr12947266qcc.12.1402088933603; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 14:08:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140606215853.0c6ecae9@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> References: <140603191227.ZM28198@torch.brasslantern.com> <140604223723.ZM22960@torch.brasslantern.com> <140605085319.ZM4272@torch.brasslantern.com> <20140606215853.0c6ecae9@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 14:08:53 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: break/continue vs. try-always From: Bart Schaefer To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133ba66d4ebea04fb314481 --001a1133ba66d4ebea04fb314481 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Jun 6, 2014 2:04 PM, "Peter Stephenson" wrote: > > We could do something like add "break -r" to reset. It would only be > usable in always blocks (not sure about traps) because otherwise you > don't get the chance to execute it. I was thinking perhaps "break 0" which is otherwise/currently an error. Assuming the break handler can tell when it is in the scope of an always block. --001a1133ba66d4ebea04fb314481--