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

Re: [half-patch][feedback?] exec compatibility

On 2007-04-30 at 10:39 +0100, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> Ideally munging of options should be done by the builtin handler, with
> the options defined by the entry in builtins[] in builtin.c.  For normal
> builtins that's in execbuiltin().  However, it's not currently
> implemented for precommand modifiers.  One reason for that is probably
> that usually the word following is to be treated like a command even if
> it looks like an option.  Still, it would be neater to have a general
> option parser of some sort in this case.  However, it may be overkill
> just for this one use.

Oh good, it's not just me then.  I had similar thoughts.

> Send me a Sourceforge user name if you want commit access.

Thanks, but I feel more comfortable having someone else preview the
stuff before it gets committed, to catch the most obvious stuff.
$employer uses a formal code-review process integrated into the commit
hooks for Perforce and it works well enough that I wish other places had
it ... the zsh sourceforge page suggests that the patch tracking system
isn't much used.

Perhaps if I keep up the interest in zsh internals and learn enough to
be safe.


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