Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-Originating-IP: [86.21.161.213]
X-Spam: 0
X-Authority: v=2.1 cv=OJTapnuB c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=oo3MgO7t/4XyXFuSzI3dDQ==:117
 a=oo3MgO7t/4XyXFuSzI3dDQ==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10
 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=q2GGsy2AAAAA:8 a=RP6f-Tr3y_JkgtYzxvQA:9
 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=z9dJwno5l634igLiVhy-:22
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 21:20:58 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@ntlworld.com>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Fix the ':A' word modifier on paths with '..'
 components.
Message-ID: <20160703212058.07314f77@ntlworld.com>
In-Reply-To: <160701090529.ZM9013@torch.brasslantern.com>
References: <20160613085218.GA9572@tarsus.local2>
	<1466474004-4669-1-git-send-email-danielsh@tarsus.local2>
	<1466474004-4669-2-git-send-email-danielsh@tarsus.local2>
	<CAHYJk3QPM+wKmzoT5jhPD90e=kYpdT0Yf2hNXcZd9woUSov+Mg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160625162807.GA9840@tarsus.local2>
	<CAHYJk3SrjHP3mT+c7xWH49ozhh18WHvLC5LRUzoZwWnkSSv8fA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160627002031.GA20366@tarsus.local2>
	<160628074851.ZM26955@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<20160701051106.GA31422@tarsus.local2>
	<160701090529.ZM9013@torch.brasslantern.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Seq: zsh-workers 38782

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 09:05:29 -0700
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> On Jul 1,  5:11am, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> } Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Fix the ':A' word modifier on paths with '..' 
> }
> } What's the use-case for the "resolve '..' before symlinks" behaviour?
> } 
> } Was it an intentional design feature, or simply a documented bug?
> } (Honest question.)
> 
> PWS will have to weigh in on that one.  The use-case may simply have
> been the intention to make :A a superset of :a.

I think making :A a superset of :a was all there was to it.  I don't
think there was any specific strategy for dealing with non-obvious cases
involving "..".

pws

