Re: A couple completion glitches

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 24, 11:00pm, I wrote:
}
} Hmm; looks like there's a bug in `zstyle -T', though I have no idea how
} that crept in.  Look here:
} 
} zagzig% zstyle -L
} zstyle ':completion:*' completer _expand _complete
} zstyle ':completion:*:expand:*' suffix yes
} zagzig% zstyle -t :completion::expand::: suffix && echo suffix is set  
} suffix is set
} zagzig% zstyle -T :completion::expand::: suffix && echo suffix not set
} suffix not set
} 
} It shouldn't be possible for them both to return true.

Of course, I'm silly.  It certainly should be possible for both to return
true.  I keep forgetting that the difference between -t and -T is how they
treat the case of the style NOT being set, not how they treat it when it
IS set.

So in fact for the original question:

} }     % touch foo{1..3}
} }     % ls ~/foo*<tab>
} } 
} } ...and nothing happens!

You DO need to set the suffix style, but you need to set it to "false".

Which, now that I think about it, sounds backwards to me.  It means "do
not make a special case of expansions that have a suffix" but it *seems*
to mean "do not expand the suffix."  Which is how I got confused about
what _expand was testing with "zstyle -T" in the first place ...

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net