Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: _files vs _path_files discussion (old thread)
- X-seq: zsh-workers 10086
- From: Adam Spiers <adam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: _files vs _path_files discussion (old thread)
- Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 13:02:33 +0000
- In-reply-to: <1000312062134.ZM27047@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 06:21:34AM +0000
- Mail-followup-to: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <20000311222225.A27795@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1000312001854.ZM26814@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20000312005127.A28688@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1000312062134.ZM27047@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1000312063459.ZM27076@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <199909170728.JAA01949@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20000311222225.A27795@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1000312001854.ZM26814@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20000312005127.A28688@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1000312062134.ZM27047@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: Adam Spiers <adam@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for these explanations Bart, and apologies for missing the
thread the first time round.
Bart Schaefer (schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> So you also need e.g.:
> zstyle ':completion::complete:tar::directories' file-patterns '*(-/)'
> You can of course replace :tar:: there with :*:*: to make all commands
> that use _files complete directories; but as Sven mentions in 9864,
> you may not want that, which is why the file-patterns are required to
> be given in the first place.
I've settled on the following for now, and it doesn't seem to have any
of the unwanted side-effects mentioned:
# Include non-hidden directories in globbed file completions
compstyle '::complete:*' \
tag-order 'globbed-files directories' all-files
compstyle '::complete:*:*:directories' file-patterns '*~.*(-/)'
It's almost perfect ... The only problem left is in the handling of
hidden directories; ideally, I would want hidden directories only to
appear when the leading `.' is specified manually, because I have so
many hidden directories in my home directory that they swamp the
initial completion list. However, because they are not covered by the
file-patterns style for the directories tag, if I do:
$ tar zxf .foodir/<TAB>
it's presumably using all-files, which has the initial problem of not
listing directories by default. So what I'm really after is something
zstyle ':completion::complete:*:*:directories' \
zstyle ':completion::complete:*:*:unhidden-directories' \
zstyle ':completion::complete:*' tag-order \
'globbed-files unhidden-directories' \
'globbed-files directories' \
except that that doesn't work, presumably because you can't just dream
up new tags like that, and maybe you can't even mention tags twice in
tag-order. So, is there a solution, and if not, would it be totally
unrealistic to allow something like the above zstyle code? Actually,
even if that code worked, it still wouldn't quite do what I want,
because at the `.foodir/<TAB>' stage it would be completing from the
'globbed-files directories' bit (or would it?), which would mean that
it would list `.foodir/.bardir', which I wouldn't want it to. Looks
like what I'm asking for would require considering each path component
separately. Urgh. Now my head's spinning.
> [*] Sven's suggested change was:
> } ... should we make the directories tag with its usual pattern be
> } tried automatically if the user explicitly sets the file-patterns tag
> } for globbed-files? Or should we do that only if the directories tag,
> } file-patterns style is given, but allow an empty value to stand for
> } `the normal pattern'?
> I meant to reply to that and hadn't got around to it yet.
> My short answer is that I don't think there's any good solution. The
> tag-order style is going to be confusing no matter what we do; people
> are always going to wonder why, when they can see "directories" in the
> tag-order style, they still don't get any directories completed. It's
> a case of intuition being at odds with logical semantics, and I can't
> think of any way to make the intuition work without ruining the logic.
> Automatically adding directories when globbed-files is given only makes
> things cloudier; allowing an empty pattern to stand for '*(-/)' doesn't
> alleviate the need to provide the directories style, which is the real
> basis of the confusion. So I think I'd leave the code as is, and put
> some kind of blaring all-caps text in the tag-order documentation:
> NAMING A TAG IN TAG-ORDER DOES NOT CAUSE COMPLETIONS FOR THAT TAG TO BE
> GENERATED; RATHER, IT SORTS THE COMPLETIONS AFTER THEY ARE GENERATED.
I'd agree. Actually, now I know the stuff in blaring all-caps, I
don't find it that confusing anyway.
> One additional thought: It would be nice to be able to specify that
> _paths_ are completed, rather than merely directories; i.e. like the
> difference between "compctl -g '*(-/)'" and "compctl -/". I'm not
> convinced that "zstyle *directories file-patterns '*(-/)'" does that.
What is the difference? I can't see any, but I'm probably missing
> Hrm, maybe even add "... BUT ONLY _IF_ ANY ARE GENERATED FOR THAT TAG."
Messages sorted by: