From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-17305-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.dk>
Received: (qmail 6710 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2002 16:45:10 -0000
Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Jun 2002 16:45:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 8005 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2002 16:45:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 17305
Received: (qmail 7987 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2002 16:45:01 -0000
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 09:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Sender: schaefer@ns1.sodaware.com
To: Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com>
cc: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@sunsite.dk>
Subject: Re: PATCH: tweak to `zle -I' 
In-Reply-To: <19399.1023466957@csr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206070944140.4828-100000@ns1.sodaware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Peter Stephenson wrote:

> Do you mean 0?  It currently returns 1 on subsequent calls.  I suppose
> you mean 0 should indicate zle was active, i.e as follows.

Ah, yes, that is what I meant, thanks for reverting my inverted logic.