From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-29801-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 19300 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2011 22:49:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 29801
Received: (qmail 5786 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2011 22:49:03 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at closedmail.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-id: <110925154859.ZM20325@torch.brasslantern.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 15:48:59 -0700
In-reply-to: <20110912205148.6d1317d6@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@ntlworld.com>
 "Re: 4.3.13 changes" (Sep 12,  8:51pm)
References: <20110722120838.09c2fd80@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
	<CADdV=Mt0-rH-wkbrHng9GiF+FGa4p9zz1-vdewn=48z1ZA-RmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110912205148.6d1317d6@pws-pc.ntlworld.com>
X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005)
To: "Zsh Hackers' List" <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: 4.3.13 changes
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Sep 12,  8:51pm, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: 4.3.13 changes
}
} On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 13:13:49 +0200
} Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:
} > Can you please have a look at the '*:: :->file' problem [...] ?
} > The gist of it is that options don't complete after
} > arguments if you use "::" instead of ":".
} 
} I can't see any evidence not being able to complete options thereafter
} is deliberate.

I suspect the internals that support _arguments assume that you don't
mix arguments with options except when the arguments are those of a
particular option; that is, that a command always looks like

	command-name command-options command-arguments

where command-options may be zero or more sets of

	option option-arguments

I seem to recall discussions on the austin-group (POSIX) list about
the correctess of allowing more options to follow command-arguments, and
incompatibilities introduced by variant utilities which allow that.

The very fact that NORMARG is defined as "_the_ position of the first
normal argument" (my emphasis) seems to imply that comparguments does
not expect there to be more than one cluster of options, with all the
non-option arguments following it.