RE: PATCH: _expand, _expand_word, and their doc

["Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru>]

> +inserted into the command line.  This style is most useful when set
> +only for very specific completion contexts.

I continue to ask myself just how useful it is.

completions style is tested only in _expand. It is either called from
_main_complete or directly (currently from _expand_word only). At the time
when completions style is tested, context is

:completion::expand::

-or-

:completion:expand-word:expand::

(I just realized, that completer has fixed value in this case :-)

Even if _main_complete would have set command name, the most sepecific context
would be

:completion:*:expand:${command_name}::

Anything more specific is set (if ever) only inside of per-command competion
function. It means, that at most you can request insertion of all completions
for a given command. It is very unlikely that anybody ever really wants it.
While in case of 'cvs rm TAB' insertion is appropriate, it is hardly useful in
case of 'cvs -TAB'. And currently even this is not possible - at most you can
state that all completions should be inserted for a given widget :-))

Unless I again miss something obvious.

-andrej