From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3678 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2002 15:08:19 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 20 Aug 2002 15:08:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 19982 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2002 15:08:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 17568 Received: (qmail 19960 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2002 15:08:08 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1020820150739.ZM18296@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 15:07:39 +0000 In-Reply-To: <15714.12003.280325.857811@wischnow.berkom.de> Comments: In reply to Sven Wischnowsky "Re: About menu selection (again)" (Aug 20, 1:58pm) References: <3D56CD6E.mailMX1LBVZ3@viadomus.com> <1020812060148.ZM28748@candle.brasslantern.com> <3D5906BF.mail17S21TJ8M@viadomus.com> <1020813150050.ZM30758@candle.brasslantern.com> <3D5954F7.mail1L21A9GN@viadomus.com> <3D595620.mail3I11T8QF@viadomus.com> <1020814022702.ZM31935@candle.brasslantern.com> <3D5CEB3E.mailV211HY5E@viadomus.com> <15708.60068.71382.607117@wischnow.berkom.de> <1020817172639.ZM6260@candle.brasslantern.com> <15714.12003.280325.857811@wischnow.berkom.de> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: About menu selection (again) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Aug 20, 1:58pm, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: } } Bart Schaefer wrote: } } > Could we do something along the lines of [...] } } We should actually be able to get by with just a tiny flag, that's set } when a completion widget is defined. Or am I wrong. No, you're not wrong. I was thinking that it should be something tied to the module system so that if somebody else writes a completion module, it wouldn't need to know about this extra flag -- but any module that really wants to use compcore etc. has to tie into `zle -C', so it's probably OK. } Ideally, this should really check, if any completion widgets are bound } to keys, shouldn't it? That's not as obvious ... if no completion widgets are bound to keys, how would you get into docomplete() in the first place? } +/* != 0 if there are any defined completion widgets. */ } + } +/**/ } +int hascompwidgets; Shouldn't that be `mod_export int hascompwidgets;' ? } + /* We the C-code's point of view, we can only use compctl as a default "We the C-code"? In order to form a more perfect unix? -- 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