From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19366 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 17:06:31 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 17:06:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 23858 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 17:06:25 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 17:06:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 10888 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2004 17:06:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 8139 Received: (qmail 10874 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 17:06:07 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 17:06:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 22709 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2004 17:06:06 -0000 Received: from ns9.hostinglmi.net (213.194.149.146) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 27 Oct 2004 17:06:04 -0000 Received: from 212.red-80-35-44.pooles.rima-tde.net ([80.35.44.212]:60207 helo=dervishd.net) by ns9.hostinglmi.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1CMrFN-0002gr-14 for zsh-users@sunsite.dk; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:06:05 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:08:51 +0200 From: DervishD To: Zsh Users Subject: Yes, another completion question Message-ID: <20041027170851.GB10509@DervishD> Mail-Followup-To: Zsh Users Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: DervishD X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns9.hostinglmi.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sunsite.dk X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - dervishd.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=6.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Hits: 0.0 Hi all :) After playing with compsys a bit I've started to play with compctl. Well, I don't have any doubt about compsys being more powerful with the shipped functions but... What I mean is: if I just want to tweak a bit the default completions (that is, no functions, just the default widgets) so cd only gets directories completed and pax only tarballs, is compsys the solution? I don't think so, but I really would like your advice. If I want to use compsys so 'cd' only gets directories completed when I hit tab, I must rewrite expand-or-complete, taking into account if I'm dealing with relative paths, absolute paths, named directories and maybe a dozen or more additional problems, but with compctl I just do 'compctl -/ cd' and it works. I'm sure that I'm wrong, but as I see the issue, compsys is only useful with the shipped functions, because compadd is very low level and a lot of work must be done in order to make it work as intended. All that additional work is already done in the shipped functions, but I don't feel like using that lot of code just to make cd complete directories only... The new completion system is more configurable, more powerful, etc. but I don't think I need all that configuration and power. In fact I prefer the old way, with a dozen compctl commands to make my life easier... Am I plainly wrong? Is compctl going to dissappear soon and I should not put a minute of work in writing my compctl recipes? Only a thicko would use compctl instead of compsys?... I don't want to start a flamewar 'compsys vs. compctl', just want to know more about all that to make an oppinion. Thanks for all, boys :)) Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 http://www.dervishd.net & http://www.pleyades.net/