From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8036 invoked from network); 3 Sep 1999 07:42:22 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 3 Sep 1999 07:42:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 24323 invoked by alias); 3 Sep 1999 07:42:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 2559 Received: (qmail 24315 invoked from network); 3 Sep 1999 07:42:04 -0000 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 09:41:37 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199909030741.JAA03749@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-users@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Fri, 3 Sep 1999 05:25:49 +0000 Subject: Re: different kind of glob_complete? Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Sep 3, 12:39am, Will Day wrote: > } Subject: different kind of glob_complete? > } > } Here's something I've been wondering about - can I get zsh to perform menu > } completion of glob patterns that match exactly the end of a string? > } > } I'm thinking this would be like glob_complete: > } but _without_ the trailing '*'? > > This is interesting. Compare manual entries; here again is 3.1.6: > > [ manuals for 3.0.6 and 3.1.6 being differently ] > > I think the 3.1.6 behavior was introduced by Sven in zsh-workers/5871, and > was briefly discussed at that time. Here's a case where it might differ a > lot from the 3.0.6 behavior, and it sounds as if Will would prefer the old > form -- in fact, he'd prefer that completion were not attempted again when > no matches are found in the first place. > > You can certainly get this by some arrangement of the settings for the new > function-based completion system, but I could understand the confusion if > formerly zsh glob-completed file.11 and file.21 but now it glob-completes > filefoo91blather as well. No, the behavior wasn't changed, only the manual was corrected, see zsh-workers/5879. I /think/ we once had this (trying it first without the `*'), but I don't remember when we lost it. And, of course for the new completion system it's already there, just use the `_match' completer with a configuration of `match_original=only' or `match_original=yes'. So, yes, the code in tricky.c can do this now (this was added in 5871), but I didn't change the behavior of compctl-style completion. We could add an option to allow this for it, but should we? Or may this be an incentive to go to the new completion system? Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de