From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 990 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 19:21:32 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Apr 2000 19:21:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 21476 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2000 19:21:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10522 Received: (qmail 21455 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 19:21:15 -0000 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: Still problems with scriptname (presumably) In-reply-to: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Wed, 05 Apr 2000 10:15:55 +0200." <200004050815.KAA01596@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 20:21:08 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Message-Id: Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > You'll have noticed that my patch (still not committed) doesn't change > $0, it just keeps that from being used as the `name' for printing > errors and warnings. > > So... ;-) > > (I'd be in favour of using the patch, the current behaviour looks so weird.) Aha. Confusion is a wonderful thing. Yes, as far as internal management of names goes that would be fine. It's explicitly separate from argzero anyway, because of the [no]functionargzero bodge, and I've taken to using `print -P %N' to get function names in messages, so your patch would seem to be a sensible way forward. -- Peter Stephenson Work: pws@CambridgeSiliconRadio.com Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk