From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-33241-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 18411 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2014 10:03:12 -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: 33241
Received: (qmail 5011 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2014 10:03:01 -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=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham
	version=3.3.2
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;
        bh=RwI/o1e7jFihc1mx0xfKfQomqSpgaJ4nqvTy5hLFpSg=;
        b=IudhYU5hcmsuygh1juPoJ4FxroRYZGy7NKC8EZnRWxuSY6Oo3LCJpp444AADqBuhn/
         VKenABeqKxPLJNbKQuesfTrigEsEaA4zsd9mD20GWd+E7XBkyfXarfma7MW9CwJJxSBL
         20qjD1dv2nxmeLuEv5YGx4pb1ji8Z5SiRLbowYIeGwQNh8HFQMbWhmMTP8qdJ86/UWyT
         Miq8zCazUVJALFcJrXv67MXeBa3sYX2CH10jytcRjAr5K6XNoNumpJ5itJ7x6EkOcWOG
         KBIueQBojhF5VPrg2Cx+heOarzXOdilsQN4EpFpRUYFN6+oyAuVoK0vVaiph6r5+whvl
         9ASA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.138.194 with SMTP id qs2mr3291521igb.4.1411639375353;
 Thu, 25 Sep 2014 03:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAH+w=7ZOaTpcsQY+Kt5hnDr218LOfmz21Xp1-rZqnaD0zbS0Zg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHYJk3SXb_hgz-abLaoLeU=U-Y0zwm=vHv-o+Oeg6=C3CedjUQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140924152625.73dfa6d9@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<CAHYJk3TR=EaB2yOTO_ZDGtnxrPatUNoj4CrG2SMy62vooLaUeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH+w=7ZOaTpcsQY+Kt5hnDr218LOfmz21Xp1-rZqnaD0zbS0Zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:02:55 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHYJk3TZat+YOyx6BDTBZHyqppRE=97vKaAw4z0nmu_4nTOB+A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Surprising parsing result with anonymous functions and for loops
From: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Cc: zsh workers <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 25 September 2014 07:35, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Okay, so an anonymous function without braces should not possibly be
>> able to take arguments, because they are either part of the single
>> command in the function, or if you have a ;, they are not part of the
>> function definition at all.
>
> That's not quite how it works.  The foo() case is a function
> definition, but the "anonymous" case is simultaneously a definition
> and a call.  In the latter situation, the parser consumes a valid
> function definition, and then anything left over is its arguments.
> Since "for a { echo $a }" is a valid function body, the parse switches
> to looking for arguments after that point.  In the former case, there
> is no implicit function call, so it is an error for anything to be
> left over.
>
> The presence of braces around the entire body simply allows the parser
> to distinguish the body from the arguments.  If there are other
> syntactic clues, those also distinguish body from arguments, e.g., the
> token "done" here:
>
> () for a; do echo $a; done bing bong
>
> Note that the semicolons didn't terminate the function definition,
> because they are part of the for-do-done compound syntax.

Okay, but does anyone at least agree that doing alias expansion at
that point is highly surprising?

-- 
Mikael Magnusson