Re: Completion problems.

[Tanaka Akira <akr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

In article <199908040937.LAA15313@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
  Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I see two ways to go: 1) completely change the completion code to
> report strings in unquoted form or 2) add a parameter expansion
> modifier which does something like the opposite of `:q'.
> Unfortunately, 1) is extremly hard and error-prone.

I think that (1) is right way though I didn't know it's extremly hard
because I'm not know the code internal well.

(2) is good and it is required for implementation of completers if (1)
is realized. But it is also useful for current completers. Thanks.

> I don't understand you here, sorry. Oh, after reading further: do you
> suggest something like the `opposite-of-:q'-thing or a builtin to work 
> on quoted/unquoted strings?

Yes.
# Sorry for my bad English.

> Also: changing a'#' to a\# is intentional and was discussed -- see
> 6400 and follow-ups (especially 6460 for this example). 

Ok, I understand. I didn't think match specs.  But... is this
intentional?

Z:akr@is27e1u11% zsh-3.1.6-pws-1 -f
is27e1u11% autoload -U compinit; compinit -D; compdef _tst tst
is27e1u11% _tst () { compset -P '*/'; compadd tst }
is27e1u11% var=val
is27e1u11% tst 'a'$var/<TAB>

-> 

is27e1u11% tst 'a$var/tst' 

# My reply may be slow, since I'm bit busy now, 
-- 
Tanaka Akira