Re: PATCH: Re: zrecompile

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> On Apr 4,  4:07pm, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> } Subject: PATCH: Re: zrecompile
> }
> } Bart Schaefer wrote:
> } 
> } > } And another thing: the zwc files till use $ZSH_VERSION in the header
> } > } to test for compatibility -- somehow I didn't like to add an additional 
> } > } version number scheme for them, but it would be better, I think (the
> } > } format will certainly change less often than $ZSH_VERSION).
> } > 
> } > Yea, but it'll be much less recognizable in the -t output.  I think the
> } > $ZSH_VERSION test is fine.
> 
> Having thought about it a bit longer now, I have a suggestion: Put *both*
> a .zwc version number *and* $ZSH_VERSION into the header.  When the .zwc
> version doesn't match, display the $ZSH_VERSION string in the error output.
> That completely hides the .zwc version from anyone who would be confused
> by it, while avoiding the need to recompile when the shell is upgraded.

Wouldn't that be rather confusing? I mean: for some reason we have to
change the zwc-version, but the ZSH_VERSION is still the same. The shell
can't load an old zwc file and says: `wrong version (...)' where `...'
is the same as $ZSH_VERSION.

This would only affect people upgrading their shell between releases,
though... hm.

Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx