Patch attached, but not yet including Daniel’s suggested change below (since I still have questions about it). It includes an update to the docs, but note that I am not able to build those myself. I would much appreciate it f someone else could do that to test whether I did it correctly.

On 14 Apr 2021, at 15:05, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> +++ b/Functions/Prompts/promptinit
>> @@ -178,8 +177,13 @@ Use prompt -h <theme> for help on specific themes.'
>> 
>>        # Reset some commonly altered bits to the default
>>        local hook
>> -       for hook in chpwd precmd preexec periodic zshaddhistory zshexit; do
>> -         add-zsh-hook -D "${hook}" "prompt_*_${hook}"
>> +       for hook in chpwd precmd preexec periodic zshaddhistory zshexit \
>> +           zsh_directory_name; do
>> +         add-zsh-hook -D "$hook" "prompt_*_$hook"
>> +       done
>> +       for hook in isearch-exit isearch-update line-pre-redraw line-init \
>> +           line-finish history-line-set keymap-select; do
>> +         add-zle-hook-widget -D "$hook" "prompt_*_$hook"
> 
> All these should be documented, like prompt_${foo}_preview is.
> 
> Recommend to name these prompt_${foo}_bar-{isearch-exit,isearch-update,…,keymap-select}
> for some fixed value of «bar» to avoid namespace issues (i.e., name
> collisions between existing prompts and future hooks).

Wouldn’t that be a breaking change in the API, though? I mean, there are already 3rd party prompt themes that use the current prompt_${foo}_{isearch-exit,isearch-update,…,keymap-select} naming scheme. Also, isn’t the prefix prompt_${foo}_ already a namespace of sorts? Why change this?