From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7301 invoked from network); 13 Sep 1999 14:43:35 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 13 Sep 1999 14:43:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 24252 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 1999 14:43:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7810 Received: (qmail 24245 invoked from network); 13 Sep 1999 14:43:07 -0000 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 16:42:57 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199909131442.QAA21467@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Andrej Borsenkow"'s message of Fri, 10 Sep 1999 19:59:04 +0400 Subject: RE: Size of select listing? Andrej Borsenkow wrote: > > It doesn't so much relate to handling the screen size but, one area > > which I really don't like about the way _arguments and _long_options > > work is the way options are considered possible matches straight-away. > > It does relate to screen size. I repeat - if I have a "Really Large List" of > matches, zsh asks me if I want to see them before printing. But if I have a > list, that is only "a bit longer" than screen size, it is printed. > > So, my question is - why zsh prints list that is longer than screen size? Is it > intentional? I call it a bug. Either I need a way to scroll list (or to page > through it one screen at a time) - or zsh must ask me before printing it. Could you investigate further? This works well for me -- with `LISTMAX=0', of course. Have you set `LISTMAX' to something else? Is your LINES correct? (Hm, yes, I think you made sure, I just can't think of other reasons...) Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de