From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8970 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2001 00:30:30 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 23 Mar 2001 00:30:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 6277 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2001 00:30:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13719 Received: (qmail 6266 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2001 00:30:18 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <010322162918.ZM21205@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:29:18 -0800 In-Reply-To: <3ABA72A9.EB9C68FC@u.genie.co.uk> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "Re: Moving completion functions" (Mar 22, 9:46pm) References: <3ABA72A9.EB9C68FC@u.genie.co.uk> X-Mailer: Z-Mail Lite (5.0.0 30July97) To: Zsh workers Subject: Re: Moving completion functions MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 22, 9:46pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote: > Subject: Re: Moving completion functions > > > Functions/Misc/acx Functions/Examples # Misc? > > Functions/Misc/cx Functions/Examples # Misc? > > I'd delete these because they would be better written as aliases. I agree, which (jumping ahead) is why I do NOT agree with: > I would class acx, cx, harden, proto, yp, yu, checkmail, mere, zed > and zmv as useful functions which many people might want to use. I would include harden, checkmail, mere, and definitely zed as "useful functions which many people might want to use," but proto is marginal (how many people code in C with exactly Paul Falstad's style?) and to autoload all those those trivial one-liners is IMO a waste. > > Functions/Misc/multicomp Functions/Compctl > > Is this one still relevant now that we have matching control. It's too big to reasonably put in compctl-examples and remains relevant to anyone not using the new completion system. (multicomp is like the _path_files function; no real overlap with matching control AFAICT.) > > Functions/Misc/promptnl Functions/Misc > > This is new right? Was this something to do with evading the promptcr > problem? Yes, you call promptnl from precmd. I suppose it (or contrib.yo) should say that, somewhere. > > Functions/Misc/run-help Functions/Misc # Add #autoload line? > > On the basis that functions starting #autoload are autoloaded by > compinit, and that #autoload was intended for functions which are part > of the completion system, should we be using #autoload in > non-completion system related functions. That's why there's a `?' at the end of my comment. So, leave run-help as it is. > > Functions/Misc/zless Functions/Misc > > I'd delete this one too because of the LESSPIPE feature in recent > versions of less. It could always be found a good home on the web > pages. If it stays, I'd put it in Examples. I have no objection to moving this to Example. > > Functions/Misc/zls Functions/Misc > > This I'd definitely put in Examples. I can't believe anyone would use > it instead of their binary ls but it is a nice example for the stat > module. This is also fine with me. > I agree with the Compctl division although it might be better to put > them in the compctl-examples file to get them out of the way. I'd actually rather split compctl-examples up into smaller files and put them all in Functions/Compctl, but I suppose we're trying to discourage use of compctl ... > The example startup files are another thing we should look at before > 4.0. I'd be in favour of modifying them to use new-style completion and > having some typical example zstyles and generally to be a bit more > up-to-date. If there is agreement on this, I'll come up with a > suggested patch for them. The main thing I want to do with the example startup files is to add a batch of comments, possibly in all-caps, telling system administrators NOT to drop these files into /etc/z*. And maybe even put a "return 0" at the top of each file just in case some nimrod copies them to /etc/ without looking at them.