Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: loving zsh, crashing zsh...
- X-seq: zsh-users 14309
- From: Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: loving zsh, crashing zsh...
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:08:43 +0100
- In-reply-to: <5B26F0E9-7F32-48D5-A078-3CAC8949DF7D@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <f950edef0908130340s3ede9ec3hfdfe5626574a7485@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <f950edef0908130341k4824035do93d37a77801ff429@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090815173829.28e91a97@pws-pc> <5B26F0E9-7F32-48D5-A078-3CAC8949DF7D@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sebastian Stark wrote:
> Is it the "alternate forms for complex commands" you are refering to
> In the manual it says:
> "Many of zsh's complex commands have alternate forms. These
> particular versions of complex commands should be considered
> deprecated and may be removed in the future.
> versions in the previous section should be preferred instead."
> When will they finally go away or be disabled by default? I once
> converted all my scripts and functions to use these alternate forms,
> because I thought it would be good. Later I read this paragraph in the
> manual and realized it is not good to change the well established
> shell syntax in such a massive way. I then reverted all the changes I
> made to my stuff. (As a side effect non-zsh users are now able to
> understand my scripts.)
Currently there are no plans to remove them completely, but I'm very
happy to have people discouraged from using them, for reasons the
problem here at least partly indicates and you've at least partly
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx> Software Engineer
Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070 Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited
Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK
'member of the CSR plc group of companies. CSR plc registered in England and Wales, registered number 4187346, registered office Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom'
Messages sorted by: