From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4837 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 20:03:15 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 20:03:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 22916 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2004 20:01:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7351 Received: (qmail 22891 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 20:01:24 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 20:01:24 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [130.225.247.86] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 20:1:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 3029 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 20:01:24 -0000 Received: from cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk (195.92.193.18) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 20:01:21 -0000 Received: from modem-147.new-jersey.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.81.147] helo=pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk) by cmailm1.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BDqZT-0007wv-PX for zsh-users@sunsite.dk; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:01:20 +0100 Received: by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 501) id 56F1585BC; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:04:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE1885AF for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:04:38 +0100 (BST) To: zsh-users@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: How to get faster completion if I make zsh assume what I've typed so far is correct? In-reply-to: "Oliver Kiddle"'s message of "Wed, 07 Apr 2004 14:32:55 +0200." <13471.1081341175@trentino.logica.co.uk> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:04:37 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Message-Id: <20040414200438.56F1585BC@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=6.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Hits: 1.5 Oliver Kiddle wrote: > > > There are a couple of very annoying issues with this solution: > > > ambiguous matches are not cycled through correctly and it is impossible > > > to complete some pathnames. > > That's because it is enabling accept-exact for the last component and > not just the earlier path components. > > I don't know of any way to get this to work properly (short of digging > into the C source for compfiles). It really ought to be possible to > disable the partial completion. Both ought to be possible: failing to accept an exact completion early in the path can cause big problems, and there may well be times you don't want partial completion at all. But finding out how to do it might be tricky. -- Peter Stephenson Work: pws@csr.com Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk