From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10484 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2000 09:46:11 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 31 Jan 2000 09:46:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 85 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2000 09:45:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9485 Received: (qmail 29941 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2000 09:45:23 -0000 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:06:16 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200001310906.KAA27702@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Sun, 30 Jan 2000 01:27:44 +0000 Subject: Re: match again Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Jan 28, 5:47pm, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > } Subject: Re: match again > } > } -compstyle '*:options' prefix-hidden yes" > } +zstyle '*:options' prefix-hidden yes" > > (And several similar examples in comments.) > > These are not equivalent. Is it really correct to change it this way? > The actual equivalent of the "compstyle" statement would be > > zstyle ':completion*:options' prefix-hidden yes Right. > While I'm on the topic, should there be a ':' before the '*' in that > example? One of the defaults installed by compinit itself comes out > like > zstyle ':completion*:default' list-colors ... > > whereas all the others resemble one of > > zstyle :completion:correct: prompt 'correct to:' > or > zstyle ':completion:*' verbose yes > > which makes me wonder if it should be > > zstyle ':completion:*:default' list-colors ... > > Clue me on the subtlety, please. The problem is that the default tag is tested in _main_complete which doesn't add a context name, so it is tested in the simple case as `:completion:default', but when called from, e.g. _correct_word, as `:completion:correct-word:default'. A nicer pattern would be `:completion(|:*):default'. This is the one place I don't like about the context names. One solution would be to always stuff `:completion:' in front so that there are two colons before the completer name, but then we would have those double colons not only before the command name (although this may be not that big a problem). Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de