Re: Completion tests fail with patches to 11415

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> On May 17,  8:52am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> }
> } } Bart Schaefer wrote:
> } 
> } > ! line: {tst -x }{}
> } > --- 1,2 ----
> } > ! line: {tst -}{}
> } 
> } That's caused by 11406. Humm.
> } 
> } What are we supposed to do now. With respect to the patch, this
> } behaviour is correct (and quite reasonable, I think). Should we only
> } update the test? Should we make _arguments not try default-option
> } completion only when it tried a *non-empty* action?
> } 
> } I think I prefer the former.
> 
> Updating the test is fine with me.  Is the test right after it (which
> previously was expected to produce identical output) also correct with
> respect to the intended post-11406 behavior?

Yes, because there is no argument specification that was `executed'.

Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx