Re: Next release (5.3)

[Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Belatedly chiming in as someone who writes scripts in zsh
and uses :A in those.

I understand the issue is that although zshexpn(1) claims...

  This call is equivalent to `a` unless your system has the realpath
  system call (modern systems do).

... this is not the case.  Correct?  Well, I use it for this
exact purpose.

# schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx / 2016-07-07 10:20:31 -0700:
> On Jul 7,  2:00am, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> }
> } To everyone who asked about compatibility: under the existing semantics
> } of :A, "$foo" and "$foo:A" might denote different files.
> 
> But that implies that "$foo" and "$foo:a" might also denote different
> files, so why is *that* a useful transformation?

It's not, and I don't use it.

# p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx / 2016-07-05 09:33:21 +0100:
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 08:04:24 -0700
> Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > (1) Daniel's suggested change to :A [care to offer an opinion?]
> 
> I'd be vaguely inclined to make sure it does what the doc currently says
> and leave it at that.

I'd prefer (it would *fix* my scripts) this to happen.

> But that's only because I've not worked out a case where I want anything
> different.  It's too difficult to come up with a categorical answer because
> it depends whether the user is used to CHASE_BLAH behaviour (I'm not
> suggesting option-specific behaviour, either).

Has anyone brought up any realistic (as in: I'm going to use it for
such-and-such) scenario for these CHASE_FOO-related variations?
It looks like you're spending energy on something no one has any use for.

-- 
roman