From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27715 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2013 06:39:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 17575 Received: (qmail 27929 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2013 06:39:56 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, T_DKIM_INVALID,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at _netblocks.google.com designates 209.85.212.49 as permitted sender) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tRcZgICKct2HQZeD+8zyVduS4N2AAKWbcbLK3CYsp8I=; b=AXaUnwxIfwKhtjzt/BjDJ2RktEW/UgdxZO7ps8XGYsQLuB6/6Wtr/EAUdB1yFZRiq1 Mv/6fHnMHw5bUkSMZix+5JWSKuiTXwzro7XbC1D8PZ8JQr03BrHMwLMUfWbyTjgJ/eBt lPHWdo5R0WsqFw+WZTmfVMiS793yx8LUSG+P639rCLMQGcCaSHoMEQ0iLT25VUHaFA/3 M2KXuiNQ1nw4RtF6SgokIzGfJRp4YMfkEWLl5PToFWCYRiJycu8xO/cd7eKozpez/Now lJ3fLDBsdUdAffhVdGkjxARklSoBn9s6sV6plOrX4mqzRQdHMMqJBBLxHUUQq5zB0xh+ lt0A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.72.41 with SMTP id a9mr3730813vdv.7.1358404790191; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:39:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20477.1358343806@thecus.kiddle.eu> References: <20477.1358343806@thecus.kiddle.eu> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:39:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Setting state in _arguments From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jesper_Nyg=E5rds?= To: zsh-users@zsh.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307f3b86fb077704d37642b7 --20cf307f3b86fb077704d37642b7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Kiddle wrote: > _arguments has no way of knowing that subcommands can't begin with "--" > so while it adds the completion matches for the options, it also > considers the *:... rule to be applicable. > Ah, now I see. I had the wrong mental picture of what was going on. Thank you for your help. --20cf307f3b86fb077704d37642b7--