From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11378 invoked from network); 24 Mar 1999 12:18:59 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 24 Mar 1999 12:18:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 19091 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 1999 12:18:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 5924 Received: (qmail 19083 invoked from network); 24 Mar 1999 12:18:17 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 13:17:36 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199903241217.NAA20924@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Andrej Borsenkow"'s message of Wed, 24 Mar 1999 14:49:34 +0300 Subject: Re: Completion widgets, bindkey and ZLE widgets Andrej Borsenkow wrote: > A step further is to unify normal widgets (zle -N) and completion (zle -C). > Consider: > > widgets are always called using standard interface described in ZLE (with > all parameters likes BUFFER, NUMERIC etc set). > > if this is a completion widget, additional parameters (and arguments) are > setup. It's actually a bit more than this that has to be done to start a completion widget -- the completion code has to do quite a bit of initialisation before the shell function can be called. > We still need to designate widget as completion widget in this case, so > zle -N won't work - but -C can then be reduced to simple 'zle -C expand-word > function'. That will redefine complete-word and mark new widget as > completion widget. What if you want more than one completion widget behaving like one of the builtin widgets? (Just think of the special key completion widgets we already have.) > Looks somewhat cleaner ... and, later, if we find the way to make ZLE > widgets more useful, that will be automatically available to completion > widgets as well. What are you thinking about here? Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de