From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-12362-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 12855 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2000 07:10:22 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 25 Jul 2000 07:10:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 12139 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2000 07:10:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 12362
Received: (qmail 12128 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2000 07:10:09 -0000
X-Envelope-Sender-Is: Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru (at relayer david.siemens.de)
From: "Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru>
To: "Sven Wischnowsky" <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>,
   <zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk>
Subject: RE: noglob and _match
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:09:58 +0400
Message-ID: <000f01bff607$57c7f770$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <200007250650.IAA06314@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de>

>
> Andrej Borsenkow wrote:
>
> > bor@itsrm2% noglob ls *TAB
> >
> > bor@itsrm2% noglob ls Brodsky/
> > Completing file
> > Brodsky/      addrbook.d/   dikz/         observe/      test/
> > .....
> >
> > Is it correct in this case? I suspect, the same aplies to _expand as
> > well.
>
> Why not? I mean: you explicitly requested completion, so the
> completion system *must* think that you know what you're doing.
>

In this case I want to list all files that start with `*' :-))) I expect
from completion to list *real* arguments. It is the same as listing
shell functions as possible command completion after sudo. Yes, I
requested completion - but I never requested to ignore noglob. Exaclty,
because I used it, completion system *must* think I know what I'm doing.

> And it's pretty damn useful, I'd say. *Especially* with noglob (and
> even more if that noglob is hidden in an alias).
>

I think, it is a matter of personal preference ... what about - first
try with noglob respected, second not (something in the line with
fignore or ingnored-patterns). With two different tags for both? That is
probably not so easy I'm afraid.

-andrej