Command alias in non-command position

Command alias in non-command position

[Andrej Borsenkow]

I have some often used aliases, e.g. 

vi=elvis
view='elvis -R'
etc

Unfortunately, if I try to do e.g.

sudo vi ...

The /usr/bin/vi is started instead of elvis.

Is there any easy way to use my lovely aliases in this case?

thank you

/Andrej

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Bruce Stephens]

"Andrej Borsenkow" <borsenkow.msk@sni.de> writes:

> I have some often used aliases, e.g. 
> 
> vi=elvis
> view='elvis -R'
> etc
> 
> Unfortunately, if I try to do e.g.
> 
> sudo vi ...
> 
> The /usr/bin/vi is started instead of elvis.
> 
> Is there any easy way to use my lovely aliases in this case?

An obvious immediate approach would be to use global aliases:

	alias -g vi=elvis

Then vi will expand to elvis in lots of places, so "sudo vi" will run
elvis.  But "echo vi" will also print elvis, so perhaps this is too
pervasive.  Could I define sudo somehow, to say that its first
argument ought to be expanded as if it were in the command position?
(As a function, maybe?)

Is this a case for configurable expansion?  (I already think I ought
to be able to change how spell-correction works, to say that some
words just don't correspond to files (like the first argument to tar),
and possibly to say that some words ought to correspond to
non-existent files.  This feels like a related feature.)

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Zefram]

Bruce Stephens wrote:
>            Could I define sudo somehow, to say that its first
>argument ought to be expanded as if it were in the command position?

alias sudo='sudo '

permits alias expansion of the word following an alias-expanded sudo.

-zefram

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Bruce Stephens]

"Zefram" <zefram@tao.co.uk> writes:

> alias sudo='sudo '
> 
> permits alias expansion of the word following an alias-expanded sudo.

Cool.  Presumably this works with

alias xargs='xargs '

too.  Now, what about find ... -exec?

RE: Command alias in non-command position

[Andrej Borsenkow]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: B.Stephens@isode.com [mailto:B.Stephens@isode.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 9:13 PM
> To: zsh-users@math.gatech.edu
> Subject: Re: Command alias in non-command position
> 
> 
> "Zefram" <zefram@tao.co.uk> writes:
> 
> > alias sudo='sudo '
> > 
> > permits alias expansion of the word following an alias-expanded sudo.
> 
> Cool.  Presumably this works with
> 
> alias xargs='xargs '
> 
> too.  Now, what about find ... -exec?
> 
> 

And don't forget about 'sudo -u bor ...' as well ... But yes, as the first step it is cool :)

/andrej

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Bart Schaefer]

On Aug 26,  5:35pm, Bruce Stephens wrote:
} Subject: Re: Command alias in non-command position
}
} > sudo vi ...
} > 
} > The /usr/bin/vi is started instead of elvis.
} > 
} > Is there any easy way to use my lovely aliases in this case?
} 
} Could I define sudo somehow, to say that its first argument ought to
} be expanded as if it were in the command position?

Yes:

alias sudo='sudo '

The trailing space in the sudo alias tells zsh to also apply alias
expansion again to the next word that follows it.

} I already think I ought to be able to change how spell-correction
} works, to say that some words just don't correspond to files (like the
} first argument to tar), and possibly to say that some words ought to
} correspond to non-existent files.

Programmable spelling correction would be the next logical step after
programmable completion, I suppose.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Bart Schaefer]

On Aug 26,  6:13pm, Bruce Stephens wrote:
}
} "Zefram" <zefram@tao.co.uk> writes:
} > alias sudo='sudo '
} 
} Cool.  Now, what about find ... -exec?

Well ... there's always

alias -g -- -exec='-exec '

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

'man' completion

[Gossamer]

I have a nifty set of completion macros for man pages but unfortunately
they stop me from getting the filename completion when I'm specifying the
file directly, eg:

man ./goofey.1

Forget where I got the original manpage macros from, this is  it ...

# man: complete commands, otherwise complete by search of $MANPATH.
# This is placed as an all-encompassing pattern at the end because
# making it the default before the -x doesn't work.  (It becomes
# '-c + (-K 'match-man' -x ...), not (-c + -K 'match-man') -x ...).
# We also complete paths for -M (override manpath), commands for
# -P (pager) and disable for -S (search sections).  After an explicit
# number (which it helps to complete for you), these completion rules
# assume a thorough search is needed and no longer uses the '-c' hashed
# commands, relying entirely on what's really in the manpath.
compctl -x 'S[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]' -k '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)' \
  - 'R[[1-9nlo]|[1-9](|[a-z]),^*]' -K 'match-man' \
  - 's[-M],c[-1,-M]' -g '*(-/)' \
  - 's[-P],c[-1,-P]' -c \
  - 's[-S],s[-1,-S]' -k '( )' \
  - 's[-]' -k '(a d f h k t M P)' \
  - 'p[1,-1]' -c + -K 'match-man' \
  -- man


Gossamer

-- 
: Gossamer     gossamer@tertius.net.au  | Xanadoodler
: http://www.tertius.net.au/~gossamer/  | And proud of it :)
: Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with good.
: -- Mohandas Gandhi

Re: 'man' completion

[Bruce Stephens]

Gossamer <gossamer@tertius.net.au> writes:

> I have a nifty set of completion macros for man pages but unfortunately
> they stop me from getting the filename completion when I'm specifying the
> file directly, eg:
> 
> man ./goofey.1

Ah.  I think if you stick a -f right after the compctl, then that'll
give you filename completion too.

compctl -f -x 'S[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]' -k '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)' \
  - 'R[[1-9nlo]|[1-9](|[a-z]),^*]' -K 'match-man' \
  - 's[-M],c[-1,-M]' -g '*(-/)' \
  - 's[-P],c[-1,-P]' -c \
  - 's[-S],s[-1,-S]' -k '( )' \
  - 's[-]' -k '(a d f h k t M P)' \
  - 'p[1,-1]' -c + -K 'match-man' \
  -- man

Re: 'man' completion

[Bart Schaefer]

On Aug 27, 10:14am, Bruce Stephens wrote:
} Subject: Re: 'man' completion
}
} Gossamer <gossamer@tertius.net.au> writes:
} 
} > I have a nifty set of completion macros for man pages but unfortunately
} > they stop me from getting the filename completion when I'm specifying the
} > file directly
} 
} Ah.  I think if you stick a -f right after the compctl, then that'll
} give you filename completion too.

Yes, that's right, but it might be preferable to use -g with the same
pattern that's in the R[] expression:

	compctl -/ -g '*.([1-9nlo]|[1-9](|[a-z]))' ...

Also, I don't know what the "match-man" function does, but if it's nothing
more than a search of $MANPATH as Gossamer's comment suggested, then it
can be replaced with

	-g "${(@)^${(s(:))MANPATH}}/*/*.([1-9nlo]|[1-9](|[a-z]))(:t:r)"

The only missing bit being that if you want to use the section number to
restrict the search (i.e. "man 5 x<TAB>" completes only to "xferlog" and
not to "xterm" etc.), then you need a function.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Re: 'man' completion

[Sven Guckes]

Quoting Bart Schaefer (schaefer@brasslantern.com):
> The only missing bit being that if you want to use the section
> number to restrict the search (i.e. "man 5 x<TAB>" completes only
> to "xferlog" and not to "xterm" etc.), then you need a function.

Such as?  ;-)

I presume there must be some non-plus-ultra completion control for "man".
But which *is* the best?

Sven  [hoping to see more of this on this maillist]

Re: 'man' completion

[Bart Schaefer]

On Aug 28,  6:42pm, Sven Guckes wrote:
> Subject: Re: 'man' completion
>
> Quoting Bart Schaefer (schaefer@brasslantern.com):
> > The only missing bit being that if you want to use the section
> > number to restrict the search (i.e. "man 5 x<TAB>" completes only
> > to "xferlog" and not to "xterm" etc.), then you need a function.
> 
> Such as?  ;-)

Uhh, such as

function complete_man_in_section {
  emulate -R zsh
  setopt localoptions nullglob
  local args
  read -Ac args
  args=(${args:#-*})	# Delete all words beginning with "-"
  reply=(${(s(:))^MANPATH}/man$args[2]/*.([1-9nlo]|[1-9](|[a-z]))(:t:r))
}

> I presume there must be some non-plus-ultra completion control for "man".
> But which *is* the best?
> 
> Sven  [hoping to see more of this on this maillist]

There have been more different "man" completions posted to zsh mailing lists
than any other sample completion.  Look through the archives on www.zsh.org.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Re: maillist archive lacking search engine

[Sven Guckes]

Quoting Bart Schaefer (schaefer@brasslantern.com):
> There have been more different "man" completions posted to zsh mailing lists
> than any other sample completion.  Look through the archives on www.zsh.org.

Been there, done that.  I tried to have a look at the index of the
zsh workers maillist of 1998, so I had to download 65K+ for this.
And then I am supposed to download every single article in hope
that it *might* contain what I am looking for you?  Forget it.

This either needs a good search engine or someone to summarize the contents.
Until then I would not point anyone to the archive - it isn't helpful.

Sven

Re: Command alias in non-command position

[Wayne Davison]

"Bart Schaefer" wrote:
> Bruce Stephens wrote:
> } Could I define sudo somehow, to say that its first argument ought to
> } be expanded as if it were in the command position?
> 
> alias sudo='sudo '

Very nice.  There is a problem, however:

% alias cp='nocorrect cp'
% alias sudo='sudo '
% sudo cp foo bar
sudo: nocorrect: command not found

I assume there is a similar problem with the other pre-command
modifiers.

..wayne..