From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-37088-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 871 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2015 21:43:25 -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: 37088
Received: (qmail 20885 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2015 21:43:24 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=+V2KTjUdOpLENH3Th1UmvQGVEITVK2/vTLWsgAHCcQs=;
        b=utPmhFB6wBP0L4bcjL/ulmQlqz5IzajvUBivrxP+5uF2pFPJPy4YlAbfdjGunYKMd2
         hxHnJbHQlz5iWM58UwQuandz23USpOaMNPl3rqbUjGBCNPZBaB9tr9A7k37V9aKfadEe
         s0LbIOltaSO06dqv+7qUw6i3zy6N2sAywF7I30HhxNRcPMVUihQuwpRVHQEqz5psPbNE
         NxsJQW40DeshqlkzHc4bA0k3y6vex/poPCfmSQiCaApSIshsDTuzrWFPqUD80XhshbQH
         5YLVZRtBhsn21nbHh4hzHCMYiMFndyABc0P82bmKgxq/7xXmGZ8C4DDOE7gsDhqxSk6s
         POfw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.99.23 with SMTP id p23mr7400639qge.28.1447191800241;
 Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:43:20 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMzcTvN_JrZ4EcRbmV96ttwxsGhBQOZR8jJBoJ_rA2heN4w2Ng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMzcTvN_JrZ4EcRbmV96ttwxsGhBQOZR8jJBoJ_rA2heN4w2Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:43:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHYJk3S7oHyibz7iLKFuG8eTHhrVMWWiYEFDQnR1asw=1Y9nxw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: zsh glitch
From: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
To: Lane Erickson <lerickson@liveramp.com>
Cc: zsh workers <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Lane Erickson <lerickson@liveramp.com> wr=
ote:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/33639879/strange-zsh-segfault-glitch-w=
ith-function-definitions

Please post the actual question to the mailing list. In 20 years when
someone reads this in the archive, stackoverflow might not exist
anymore ;).

> Does anyone know why this behavior exists in zsh, or what zsh is trying t=
o do that causes a segfault?
>
> =E2=9E=9C  ~  (echo "hi"(); echo "hi"; echo "hi")
> [1]    65962 segmentation fault  ( echo "hi" () { ... }; echo "hi"; )
>
> =E2=9E=9C  ~  (ls(); ls; ls)
> [1]    66073 segmentation fault  ( ls -G () { ... }; ls -G; )

If it segfaults here, it's either because you're running an old
version or the compiler miscompiled, or the zsh code disagrees with
the compiler about what can be optimized out. What should happen is
the following:

% (ls(); ls; ls)
ls:1: maximum nested function level reached

What you've done is define a function that looks like this
ls() {
  ls
}
and then you call it, which causes an infinite recursion. This usually
does not end well in any language.

--=20
Mikael Magnusson