Re: [regression] %2K prompt expansion no longer works

[Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mikael Magnusson wrote on Sat, 24 Oct 2020 16:21 +0200:
> On 8/30/20, Stephane Chazelas <stephane@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > $ print -rnP %2K | hd
> > 00000000  1b 5b 34 30 6d                                    |.[40m|
> > 00000005
> >  
> > %K{2} is fine:  
> >
> > $ print -rnP '%K{2}' | hd
> > 00000000  1b 5b 34 32 6d                                    |.[42m|
> > 00000005
> >
> > Introduced by worker:30496
> > (https://www.zsh.org/mla/workers/2012/msg00421.html
> > 8a9b141652a0e4157056dc21e36a64ac712a7ee7 git commit).
> >
> > Oddly, the comment there:
> >  
> >> Well, nobody objected so here's a version with de-duplicated
> >> code. The previous patch broke %K, but it works now (passed 1
> >> for is_fg on both paths).  
> >
> > Actually describes the bug here. Looks like Mikael just missed a bit in
> > that
> > fix.
> >
> > Should be fixed with:
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/Src/prompt.c b/Src/prompt.c
> > index bc9734720..997327e18 100644
> > --- a/Src/prompt.c
> > +++ b/Src/prompt.c
> > @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ parsecolorchar(zattr arg, int is_fg)
> >  		bv->fm--;  
> >  	}
> >      } else  
> > -	arg = match_colour(NULL, 1, arg);
> > +	arg = match_colour(NULL, is_fg, arg);
> >      return arg;  
> >  }  
> 
> Just noticed that these [unposted] testcases don't pass. Added some
> debugging prints and it turns out that %F{green} uses a different code
> than specifying the number. Eg,
> 
>     echo $F1 $F2 $F3 $F4 | cat -v
> 
> results in
> 
> ^[[38;5;2m ^[[38;5;2m ^[[38;5;2m ^[[32m
> 

Isn't this what Oliver just pointed out in another thread? —

Oliver Kiddle wrote in 47491:
> Regarding (1), I just noticed that a new D01prompt test case is failing
> on FreeBSD because ${(%):-%F{2}} is not producing the same as
> ${(%):-%F{green}}. This is a new test added just last month in 47352.
> 
> This is down to TXT_ATTR_FG_TERMCAP being set for 2 but not for green.