Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: What about this? (was: RE: Zsh broken after the latest build patches)
- X-seq: zsh-workers 14073
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx (Zsh hackers list)
- Subject: Re: What about this? (was: RE: Zsh broken after the latest build patches)
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:41:40 +0000
- In-reply-to: <Tc0a88d015318ac89a2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <Tc0a88d015318ac89a2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Apr 23, 5:44pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: What about this? (was: RE: Zsh broken after the latest build
} I'd prefer, if possible, to back them off everywhere and apply them back
} later. The only good reason for using a branch would be to do simultaneous
} development. I don't think that's necessary so near to the 4.0.1 release.
The reason to branch for a release is to separate bug fixes from feature
additions. If there's a serious bug, you can release a 4.0.2 without
including all the developments that have occurred in the meantime.
However, I don't feel strongly that it's necessary. We can always branch
after the fact as long as the release revisions have a tag.
} Once this is dealt with, unless anyone still has remaining tweaks they
} think are necessary, I shall make a final pre-release with a view to
} releasing it as 4.0.1.
I looked briefly at the getindex() double-quote thing I mentioned [try to
eliminate the strchr()] and found that in fact the callers of getindex()
generally are NOT equipped to say whether the call was in double-quotes.
I'd have to add an argument to fetchvalue() as well [or a new PM_ flag]
to propagate `qt' down from paramsubst(). A new PM_ flag might not be a
bad idea ... any thoughts?
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net
Messages sorted by: