Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: [PATCH] Document echo \c behaviour
- X-seq: zsh-workers 40320
- From: Phil Pennock <zsh-workers+phil.pennock@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document echo \c behaviour
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 09:39:31 +0000
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=spodhuis.org; s=d201611; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=9H6opREKMestnE6e1FAN2xdBcbx2rX63/g+UGPlrmkQ=; b=RIN7pZnwhguAjTyN4ovC3T39lO H04Ju94NbV9HG50+L02wSqqEBW7XGG7sO70m8hNJHhZbyaKbfNKSOn7+v13a/IyB6tvggRtFnwmEd 2BVyvez95fp0Nv35y541k+bNdUjn0wkIKqFd+lS6bAy2Mru0qB2hKZhbFV+Oq9Nl/bDZIb+CxJrNG dN0hd61riZIgfrOPL+Q+eJ40M8hj;
- In-reply-to: <20170110035259.GA31866@fujitsu.shahaf.local2>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- Openpgp: url=https://www.security.spodhuis.org/PGP/keys/0x4D1E900E14C1CC04.asc
- References: <20170109203209.GA13324@breadbox.private.spodhuis.org> <20170110035259.GA31866@fujitsu.shahaf.local2>
On 2017-01-10 at 03:52 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Thanks; I pushed the first hunk. I didn't push the second one because
> I don't think it's required. If you disagree then make your case ;-).
The behaviour is bug-ass crazy nuts and needs justification. Every
other escape sequence is a character which is inserted; \c was always
a special case for "suppress the following newline", but "truncate
_everything_ else" from an _escape_ sequence is ... face-palm worthy.
It warrants explanation as to why it's so counter-intuitive.
> P.S. Overly-literal-reading corner: doesn't "All characters following...
> will be ignored" mean that «echo 'foo\cbar' 'baz' 'qux'» should be
> equivalent to «echo 'foo\cbar' '' ''»? I.e., print «foo» followed by
> two trailing spaces?
Sounds right. Take it up with the Austin Group. I believe that Bart is
masochistic enough to pay attention in those arenas and might be willing
to raise it as a spec bug.
(I tried following AG for a while, and ran away)
Messages sorted by: