Re: [9fans] control-F completion question

["Rudolf Sykora" <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1314 bytes --]

2008/10/3 andrey mirtchovski <mirtchovski@gmail.com>

> i sometimes wonder whether the ^F completion stuff wasn't left this
> way on purpose, as if to illustrate the futility of (essentially) a
> single-node solution in the presence of distributed environments.
>
> to solve what you perceive to be a problem you must ask yourself: what
> is the one thing that is fully aware of the current namespace? it's
> obviously not rio: it simply juggles windows with shells in them. is
> it the shell? putting the completion in the shell itself would work
> for plain terminals, but wouldn't work for rio. is it the kernel?
> would you bother adding to the kernel something as silly as command
> completion? how about completing across a network?
>
> all difficult questions for a silly problem ;)
>

I might again be wrong, but I thought the reason why the completion is not
in the rc is partially thanks to the fact, that rc doesn't know anything you
type until you press 'enter'. Only rio knows. (But all this is based only on
my possibly broken opinion...)
But yes, the best would be (for me and I guess for everybody, since we
usually speak to rc when we need the completion) to be as close to the rc's
namespace as possible.
Correct me, please, if I am completely off the road... :)

Ruda

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1725 bytes --]