Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Using the new completion system 'naked'
- X-seq: zsh-workers 17181
- From: DervishD <raul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, raul@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Using the new completion system 'naked'
- Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:41:44 +0200
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205171123260.28884-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- Organization: Pleyades
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205171123260.28884-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: DervishD <raul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: DervishD <raul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Bart, and thanks a lot for answering :)
>> - Will the old 'compctl' completion system disabled in the
>> future? And if the answer is 'yes', when?
>The answers are "maybe, but probably not" and "nobody knows."
Well, just as I supposed ;)
>> - Can I use the new completion system without compinstall'ing it
>> and without compinit'ing it, just by suitably calling compadd,
>> compset and compcall (no compdef...)?
>Yes, of course you can. The `compinit' system is only one of many that
>could be built on top of the compadd etc. builtins. It just happens to
>be the best one we've come up with so far.
The compinit sistem is very good, but I prefer doing it myself,
and BTW I don't really need such a powerful and complicated system.
I've tried to read '_arguments', but... well, you know ;)
>> Moreover, if the answer is not very large: what advantages gives
>> the new completion mechanism over the old one?
>Depends on what you mean by "the new completion mechanism."
Both 'compinit' system and the new builtins, as your answer
suggest. Thanks a lot for all the explanations :)))
>If you mean "the `compinit' system" then the answer is very large but
>mostly boils down to having more completions available out of the box,
For me this is not an advantage, and that's the reason of my
question. But I must admit that for new users this is fantastic. All
the zsh contributors have done a very well job.
>If you mean the compadd/compset/etc. builtins only, plus `zle -C', then
>the advantage is meant to be that the syntax is less baroque
OK, I was supposing. The syntax of compctl is not easy and
sometimes difficult to read, but I find it clearer, shorter and more
concise than most of the functions in the 'compinit' system. Just an
opinion ¿ok?, I'm not telling that the functions are badly written.
>more easily debugged
This is true. Debugging of compctl can be very hard...
>One might observe that `_arguments' has become nearly as cryptic as
>`compctl', but on the other hand it's also doing a lot more work.
I tread '_arguments' as some kind of gibberish ;))) I've read it
a couple of times (not deeply...) and I don't feel it readable...
Well, I'm now pretty informed and more confident to make little
completions for compadd 'naked' just for the sake of doing it :)
Thanks a lot, you're great, Bart :)
Messages sorted by: