From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28073 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2001 16:54:33 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 30 Mar 2001 16:54:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 7250 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2001 16:54:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13858 Received: (qmail 7239 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2001 16:54:25 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1010330165343.ZM4487@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:53:43 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20010330163501.92425.qmail@web9302.mail.yahoo.com> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "Re: Two missing completion functions that bug me" (Mar 30, 5:35pm) References: <20010330163501.92425.qmail@web9302.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: Two missing completion functions that bug me MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 30, 5:35pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote: } Subject: Re: Two missing completion functions that bug me } } % r -lD } zsh: bad option: -D } } It doesn't though. This is why I was confused - why should it accept -l } but not -D. Is this something to do with ksh behaviour being used. I suspect it's a historical artifact of `r' not being kept up to date with all the options of `fc' rather than anything intentional. According to builtin.c, `r' accepts only -n -l and -r (at the moment). Hm. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net