Re: completion

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca>]

On 01/07/2015 08:58 AM, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Peter Stephenson
> <p.stephenson@samsung.com> wrote:
>>
>> If an asterisk can match anything, there may be an ambiguity on
>> which field some given word will match.
>> Yes, they are ambiguous.  The examples probably could do with fixing.
>>
>> With some of the more complicated things you can do, this can actually
>> be hard to work around, I seem to remember.
Thanks Peter, now I know I'm not just too stoopid to understand.

<rant>
"A bit hard to work around"?  It is the work of a demented genius, 
someone who
has an IQ of 140 and the good sense of an over sexed moose.  As Peter 
once said (IIRC) there is no obfuscated code contest in zsh because we 
really don't need one.
I'd rather learn Klingon than learn about asterisks replacing 
separators.  How did this get out of the lab?  Were there only gods 
working on zsh back then?  What happens if the last of the gods gets run 
over by a bus, and there's no one left on the planet who has any idea 
how it works?  Is there anywhere else on the planet where this idea of 
asterisks replacing some arbitrary number of separators would *not* get 
you institutionalized?

<feel better now>