From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18615 invoked from network); 6 Sep 1999 11:37:26 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Sep 1999 11:37:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 4914 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 1999 11:37:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7663 Received: (qmail 4906 invoked from network); 6 Sep 1999 11:37:16 -0000 Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 13:37:14 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199909061137.NAA01937@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: Adam Spiers's message of Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:07:20 +0100 Subject: Re: PATCH: completion for perldoc Adam Spiers wrote: > How would you define a suite of command exactly? I assumed it would > be a function whose #compdef top line had many commands on it. My > _perl* stuff has a #compdef line for the pm* commands from pmtools, > and a #compdef for perldoc, but I couldn't figure out how to squash > them all into one file. Well, you can always compare `$words[1]' in an `if' or `case' and then put the stuff from the #autoloaded functions in the same file and execute it only if some parameter was set by the tests at the beginning or something like that. > I noticed Etc/Completion-style-guide soon after posting and realised > the many problems with that _perl* :-( Never mind. All this isn't fixed in stone yet and the `style-guide' is quite new. Bye Sven P.S.: And, after all, we are all still learning what is possible with the function system. P.P.S.: The function system started as an attempt to make the syntax easier to understand. And now we have a completion function that explains what it does by giving an equivalent `compctl' ;-) -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de