From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2538 invoked from network); 17 Nov 1999 12:29:05 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 17 Nov 1999 12:29:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 6510 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 1999 12:28:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 8656 Received: (qmail 6457 invoked from network); 17 Nov 1999 12:28:51 -0000 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:28:49 +0000 From: Adam Spiers To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: docs (finally) Message-ID: <19991117122849.C6248@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mail-Followup-To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk References: <199911170954.KAA02005@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <199911170954.KAA02005@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> X-URL: http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/ X-OS: Linux 2.2.12 i686 Sven Wischnowsky (wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de) wrote: > - And finally: I haven't converted the parameters used into styles > yet. But I really think we should do that. Consider the `*_accounts' > parameters. Here we look at `my_accounts', `other_accounts' and > `_accounts'. I think it would be nice to replace this with, > e.g., a pseudo tag `account' and the styles `mine' and `other' (or > something like that). We could then use the normal context-name > matching mechanism that is used for all styles as the replacement > for the `_accounts' stuff. I.e., you could do: > > compstyle '*:accounts' mine ... # global default for my accounts > compstyle '*:accounts' other ... # global default for other accounts > compstyle '*:telnet*:accounts' mine ... # my accounts for telnet > > That'd be nice, wouldn't it? I wrote the original *_accounts and for what it's worth, yes, I think that would be very nice indeed; in fact I was very tempted at the time to implement configurability similar (in principle at least) to this, but now we have a very nice way of doing it properly. Yum. > Ok, please have a look at the manual and tell me if/what you don't > like (or what you *do* like ;-). I'm saving all your recent _tags changes and I will go through them when I get the time, I promise :-) I'm looking forward to getting my teeth into some obviously juicy improvements. From reading some of your pleas for feedback, I imagine it must feel like you're simultaneously talking to Bart and a brick wall at the moment ;-)