Re: PATCH: completion

[Tanaka Akira <akr@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

In article <199908240912.LAA08973@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
  Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> This also changes `_x_options' to be a post pattern function (so that
> we don't get those stray X11 options in places where we don't want
> them), and it cleans up the `_compskip' handling.
> It also makes `_command_names' accept the option `-e' to make it
> complete only external commands and executable files -- which is then
> used in `_xterm'.

Thanks. _xterm works well now.

But I feel X toolkit options specs in _xterm is bit redundant.
I think _xt_arguments such as following is useful.

# Since XrmParseCommand does not accept short options, it should not
# use "-s".

_xt_arguments () {
  _arguments \
    '-geometry:geometry:_x_geometry' \
    '-display:display:_x_display' \
    ...
    '-xrm:X resources:' \
    "$@"
}

# _gtk_arguments may be also useful.

Where is a suitable directory to store this?

Completion/User or Completion/Base (or Completion/X)?
-- 
Tanaka Akira