Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-Id: <160112175942.ZM9969@torch.brasslantern.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:59:42 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20160113010136.GA12633@tarsus.local2>
Comments: In reply to Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>
        "Re: _history-complete-older problems with $(" (Jan 13,  1:01am)
References: <CAKc7PVCnEX1rEhNqhtx7spyUVKCWukz4Tzkqr27-OV9+4hVciQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<CAKc7PVDVR=B8SWX+gSiNvtODWZ-25LtDz7jXVDH8BtrcxMnjXQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<160111161501.ZM5305@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVBCEM=46YmgmhPR==Rq+pSfY+hgr8bcOMLV=zLFm6THBg@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20160113010136.GA12633@tarsus.local2>
To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: _history-complete-older problems with $(
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Jan 13,  1:01am, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
}
} Strictly speaking, ${(z)} should always be applied to $PREBUFFER$LBUFFER
} or $PREBUFFER$BUFFER, not merely to $BUFFER, otherwise things like
} string literals with embedded newlines can confuse the result.

Hmm, that's a difficult call.  That also means setting the $words array
to the full parse of $PREBUFFER$BUFFER, which I don't think matches what
the completion internals do.

OTOH the whole reason for this is to subvert the internals, so ...