From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7476 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2000 07:31:32 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Apr 2000 07:31:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 20381 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2000 07:31:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10528 Received: (qmail 20369 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2000 07:31:21 -0000 Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:16 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200004060731.JAA06356@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: Peter Stephenson's message of Wed, 05 Apr 2000 19:30:00 +0100 Subject: Re: Completion issues Peter Stephenson wrote: > > > Another thing: I couldn't get matcher-list to work for a labelled > > > completer, e.g. _complete:-extended. > > This seems to work this time. Don't what I did wrong. So what's the > difference between matcher and matcher-list now? The latter is looked up > once for a completer (but again if we have a labelled completer), but the > latter is looked up every single time we add a match? Two main differences: 1) matcher is tested for the most specific contexts possible, including the tags, matcher-list, as you said, only for the completer 2) matcher-list uses its values on after another (there is a loop), matcher uses all its values in one go But, yes, with completer-labelling one could replace matcher-list with a couple of matcher styles settings. Exactly because of that `couple of' I kept matcher-list -- it's so much more convenient. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de