Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: grammar triviality with '&&'

On 03/04/2015 12:55 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:

The feature would be there. Then every programmer is free to do what he likes.

A programmer is not forced to use this feature.

Exactly. The traditionalist wouldn't touch it in any case. All existing code would remain (*must* remain) unaffected. If an extra degree of freedom and capability was possible, and IF it could be implemented with no gotchas, then why not? This
assuming of course that it could be implemented simply and efficiently (fat
chance). I can hardly comment on the 'alias' method but it does seem contrived and maybe full of gotchas. It still seems to me that the " [[ $? -eq 0 ]] " test is implicit before any '&&' anyway, and that since a line break doesn't make the
value disappear, then

&& ...

can mean nothing other than 'grab last '$?' and continue parsing'. The 'errexit'
thing is a feature or a gotcha as you guys decide.

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author