debug print left in 'run-help'?

debug print left in 'run-help'?

[Greg Klanderman]

There seems to be a spurious debug print statement left in
the 'run-help' function, at around line 57:

|    builtin print -r $what

Should/can this be removed?

thanks,
Greg


Index: Functions/Misc/run-help
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Functions/Misc/run-help,v
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -r1.13 run-help
--- Functions/Misc/run-help	30 Dec 2008 05:40:56 -0000	1.13
+++ Functions/Misc/run-help	21 Apr 2009 15:54:32 -0000
@@ -54,7 +54,6 @@
 do
     what=$places[$i]
     [[ -n $noalias && $what = *" is an alias "* ]] && continue
-    builtin print -r $what
     case $what in
     (*( is an alias)*)
 	[[ ${what[(w)6]:t} != ${what[(w)1]} ]] && run-help ${what[(w)6]:t}

Re: debug print left in 'run-help'?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Apr 21, 11:56am, Greg Klanderman wrote:
} Subject: debug print left in 'run-help'?
}
} There seems to be a spurious debug print statement left in
} the 'run-help' function, at around line 57:
} 
} |    builtin print -r $what
} 
} Should/can this be removed?

I see that PWS committed this, but I think that was wrong.  That print
has always been there since the first revision of run-help, and is not
a spurious debugging statement.

It's intended to make sure that useful output is produced in the event
that the case-statement that follows it branches off into an unexpected
place or outputs nothing.  For example, with that "builtin print"
statement present:

schaefer[524] ls<ESC-h>
schaefer[524] run-help ls
ls is an alias for ls -CF
Press any key for more help or q to quit

At this point if you press anything other than "q", you get the manual
page for "ls".

With that "builtin print" removed:

schaefer[526] ls<ESC-h>
schaefer[526] run-help ls
Press any key for more help or q to quit

Umm, no.

Please back out this change.

-- 

Re: debug print left in 'run-help'?

[Greg Klanderman]

>>>>> Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> writes:

> Please back out this change.

Yes, I agree, sorry about that Bart.  Looks like PWS already reverted it.

There was a case where it was producing output I didn't want to see,
I'll have to see if I can figure out what that was.

Greg