Re: comments in completion

[Bruce Stephens <B.Stephens@xxxxxxxxx>]

schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx said:
> The problem with job numbers and process IDs is that you have to
> generate the explanation on the fly.  Maybe what we need is a way to
> run a function to provide the -X output, rather than having only a
> fixed string. 

Yes, we definitely want this.  I've wanted for a while to get used to using 
the directory stack thingy (apart from just popd and the autopushd option), 
and having nice completion would be really useful for this.

A better way to do it might be to extend the programmable completion a bit, so 
the function could set both the list of possibilities and a list of 
descriptions of them.  That sounds a bit less hairy than yet another compctl 
flag, although I can see arguments both ways.