Re: Completion listing of command options ( Re: Size of select listing?)

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrej Borsenkow wrote:

> You can set option_prefix configuration key. In this case,  options will be
> generated only if anything else fails. This reduces list to "normal arguments"
> completion.
> 
> Still, I'd like to add handling of `--' as option terminator as well. We need
> some way (option?) to tell _arguments, that `--' ends option list for this
> command, so, that after `--' it won't try to complete command options any more.

  _arguments '--:*:all arguments after this one:<action>'

will make everything after a `--' be completed by `<action>'. RTM.

> You can make options and arguments be displayed in separate groups. It adds to
> readability but does not make list size smaller.

How should it.

> About `-' display - it is currently needed to distinguish between option(s) and
> argument(s). If you can make sure, that only options or only arguments are
> displayed - it could be omitted.

Why would you want it, I wonder. It's only a couple of characters
after all and only very seldom will the omission of the `-'s make the
list small enough to fit on the terminal if it didn't fit with the `-'s.

> But, if you make a patch, do make it to use a configuration key  :-)

*Definitely*, yes.

> Still,  _arguments, even with option_prefix set, behaves funnily:
> 
> patch TAB -> completes files. It's O.K.
> patch foo TAB -> again files. Still O.K.
> patch foo bar TAB - lists all options! But, patch can have only two arguments -
> so, I'd expected some message about it.

The fact that you only get options as possible matches even though you 
normally don't see them could be taken as a (strong) hint for that,
couldn't it? However, it wouldn't be hard to add either `:no more arguments:'
descriptions to the calls of `_arguments' or build this into
`_arguments'.

Bye
 Sven

P.S.: Btw, _long_options is dead.

--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx