From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8900 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2002 12:10:09 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 11 Mar 2002 12:10:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 24355 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2002 12:10:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 16802 Received: (qmail 24336 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2002 12:10:03 -0000 From: Sven Wischnowsky MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15500.40522.132670.814408@wischnow.berkom.de> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 13:08:42 +0100 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: Redirection completion In-Reply-To: <19534.1015846146@csr.com> References: <15500.37377.808155.293654@wischnow.berkom.de> <19534.1015846146@csr.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.95 under 21.5 (patch 3) "asparagus" XEmacs Lucid Peter Stephenson wrote: > ... > > Sorry, I didn't make my question clear. I understand how it looks for > what to execute to find completions (though I wouldn't have guessed > about `-redirect--default-' without looking at the code, although that's > logical). My question was, when I get where I'm going and try > completion, what context is seen by styles? What I'm worring about is > if I'm in some generic form of redirection completion I can still check > for `-redirect-echo-2>' in pattern-files, or does the context still just look > like `-redirect-2>' or `-redirect--default-'? Ah, I see. Currently it is as you fear, it just uses the string for which it found a completion function. That's obviously silly and I'll change that this evening. But I'm not really sure which string to prefer in each case. I'd prefer the most specific one, i.e. `-redirect-echo-2>' in this case. Would that be ok for our users if we document it? Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@berkom.de