From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-8374-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 29976 invoked from network); 22 Oct 1999 12:29:27 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 22 Oct 1999 12:29:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 4657 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 1999 12:29:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 8374
Received: (qmail 4650 invoked from network); 22 Oct 1999 12:29:15 -0000
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 14:29:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199910221229.OAA02576@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de>
From: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk
In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Fri, 22 Oct 1999 10:16:52 +0000
Subject: Re: PATCH: predict-on (Re: Completeinword and ambiguous completions)


Bart Schaefer wrote:

> [ ... ] What I want to do is described precisely by:
> 
> (0) Assume no global compmatchers.
> (1) Generate the possible matches at the current cursor position as
>     if for expand-or-complete-prefix, i.e. ignoring what follows.
> (2) Compute the common prefix of those matches.
> (3) If the common prefix matches what follows on the line, move the
>     cursor to the end of the common prefix, else no change.
> (4) Recompute matches at this (new?) position as if for completeinword.
> (5) If exactly one, insert it and put the cursor at the end of it.
> (5) Else if none, move the cursor back to the original position.
> (6) Otherwise (and if autolist) list the matches from (4).

Haven't tried, but:

1) write a simple pseudo-completer which only does:

    SUFFIX=''
    compstate[list]=''
    compstate[insert]=''
    return 1

   I.e. make the completion code only test for matches.

2) in the prediction function call the completion code with this
   completer as the first argument and all other completer you want to 
   use as other arguments

3) After that you have the unambiguous prefix in
   `_lastcomp[unambiguous]'. With `compmatchers' out of the way it
   should really be only a prefix in most cases, only functions like
   `_path_files' and functions that use their own `-M' flags may result 
   in unambiguous strings which are not only prefixes. But a bit of
   comparing that string to the stuff on the line (the prefix used by
   the completion system is saved in `_lastcomp[prefix]') and probably
   cutting `_lastcomp[unambiguous]' at the `_lastcomp[unambiguous_cursor]'
   position may reveal that.

4) Now cut off the original prefix from the unambiguous string and
   compare the rest to the beginning of `RBUFFER'. If it matches,
   move forward and try completion (without the dummy completer)
   again.

5) Then you can look at `_lastcomp[nmatches]' to see if there were
   matches.

I think this should work... but maybe I'm overlooking something.

Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de