Re: Another slight weirdness

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Stephenson wrote:

> I've set the configuration:
> 
>   compconf completer=_complete
>            correct_accept=2n \
>            correct_prompt="Correcting (%e error[s]):"
> 
> so it's not actually supposed to be using correcton or approximation, and a
> (not all that useful) directory containing
> 
> Xbarfoo2   Xfoo       Xnonofoo
> 
> and when I do
> 
> % echo foo<TAB>
> 
> (any letter of foo is enough, in fact, though I found out about this from
> omitting the first character) I get offered all the files in the directory,
> not just Xfoo.  Any ideas?  I think I've got all the patches (and if I
> haven't, you'd better tell me about it :-)).  globcomplete is not set.  I
> even get this with

This clearly shows that you have all the patches... it's that test
again. This time I've made it very explicit.

> By the way, I never liked the way _setopt and _unsetopt reflected the
> current state of the options, since usually I can't remember what's set and
> the fact I don't get offered all possibilities just confuses me.  The fact
> you now have to two $(...) calls on every single completion just to store
> the current values --- this does not seem to be the sort of thing
> completion should be doing by default --- makes me think even more strongly
> that this is just not worth it for the basic set-up and anyone
> sophisticated enough should add it themselves.  Furthermore, I get the same
> list at the moment if I do `setopt ^D' or `unsetopt ^D' (that's what I
> *want*, but it's not what should happen with the current functions).  Oh,
> wait, I see why.  Except it still doesn't work properly because of all
> those *@!@!#!** `no's when you run `unsetopt'.  That's probably a bug.

1) Oops, programming by M-w (ahem).
2) Like you I always have problems remembering which options I've set.
3) I did it this way when I first re-implemented some of the old
   example-compctls, there it is done this way.
4) But then, these examples were implemented at a time where we didn't 
   have these `no's prepended to every second option name.
5) I always wondered: is there anybody who actually likes this? Or
   should we implement something like `allopts' in C-code?

So, I wouldn't mind to change the examples to normally use only
`_options' (or even `compgen -o'), leave the other functions, comment
out the stuff in `_main_complete' and add comments to `_{un,}setopt'.

Bye
 Sven

diff -u oc/Core/_path_files Completion/Core/_path_files
--- oc/Core/_path_files	Tue Mar 23 16:14:06 1999
+++ Completion/Core/_path_files	Tue Mar 23 17:02:22 1999
@@ -424,8 +424,11 @@
   suffixes=( $str$^pats )
   suffixes=( "${(@)suffixes:gs.**.*.}" )
   tmp2=( ${~tmp1}${~matchflags}${~suffixes} )
-  tmp2=("${(@M)tmp2:#*$~patlast}")
-
+  if [[ "$tmp1" = */* && "$patlast" != \*/* ]]; then
+    tmp2=("${(@M)tmp2:#*${~patlast}}")
+  else
+    tmp2=("${(@M)tmp2:#$~patlast}")
+  fi
   if [[ $#tmp2 -eq 0 ]]; then
     # No match, insert the expanded path and add the original tail.
 

--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx