Re: Compctl completion tweaking

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jul 1,  8:13am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> Subject: Re: Compctl completion tweaking
> 
> First, I would try to change the behaviour of -P (and -S) so that they 
> are not inserted straight away, but instead [...], the prefixes
> are walked through, too [....]

This sounds to me rather like the behavior of compctl -U.  Perhaps the
use of inclusive-or should simply imply, or require pairing with, -U ?

> More problematic is the case where
> we have prefixes like, say `barrr' and `bazzz'. The completion code
> would insert the `ba' [...]
> but without completeinword (and without automenu), the user
> would have to type `rrr' or `zzz' which is a bit ugly.

That's no worse than what happens without a prefix when completing in
the middle of a word that happens to match more than one result, is it?

> So, does this seem to make sense?

Mostly, but as with most completion stuff it's probably necessary to see
it in action.