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

Re: Yes, another completion question

    Hi Bart :)

 * Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dixit:
> "New completion" started out with the noble goal of replacing the rather 
> arcane "compctl -x" syntax with the only somewhat less arcane but at least 
> more familiar syntax of the shell language.

    Given the possibility of -K to compctl I think I will never need
-x. Moreover, the syntax of -x is arcane, ok, but the things you must
do in order to make compadd work as desired is even bigger.

    I know, the work is already done, but using a thing as big and
complex as the function system provided with zsh makes me feel...
weird. For me compctl is cosier (if such a word exists in english).

> If you're not one of the people who wants or needs all of those extra 
> little bits, there's no reason to use it.

    I've written half a dozen of compctl commands (more or less)
since my first message and I think I already have the completion
system as I like it. Obviously, there is no reason for me to use
compsys. In fact, compinstall will need more of my time than writing
a couple more compctl commands, even if complex ones.

> > Is compctl going to dissappear soon and I should not put a minute of 
> > work in writing my compctl recipes?
> I don't think there's any reason that compctl will disappear -- but it's
> unlikely to get any bugfixes or further improvements, either.

    I haven't found any bug in compctl yet, although I haven't been
using it for a long time. Anyway, I've got a segfault with compadd...
surely fixed in 4.1.x and higher.

    Thanks for your advice, Bart, you're great :)

    Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado

Linux Registered User 88736
http://www.dervishd.net & http://www.pleyades.net/

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