Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:

> ...
> 
> If put _file_descriptors in Core because
> it will be used by _redirect and because other things like _options is
> there - it can always be moved.

Yes, function moving and ordering before 4.0...

The directories we have now have mostly historical reasons and several 
functions could sensibly be moved in other directories even now.

What I would like is a more logical ordering. I haven't really thought 
about this yet, but maybe a Core with some of the functions it
contains now, a directory with functions like _arguments (not really
generating completions, only helping to add them), one directory with
all those functions that generate a certain type of matches (options,
jobs, pids, file-descriptors, etc.). And then certainly one for the
builtin commands.

The other stuff is harder to decide. _rpm, for example can also be
useful on non-Linux systems. I don't know debian, but I guess the
commands from that directory can be useful elsewhere, too. So maybe we 
should package the functions in a way that reflects what the commands
do (network, package-managers, ...).

I'd like to hear suggestions about all this. (And now Andrej comes and 
says that we should put all the GNU commands on the side... which
wouldn't work with the ordering-by-what-they-do, of course. I still
think there should be only one function per command and we try to find 
out what to complete by investigating the environment inside the
functions.)


Bye
 Sven


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

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Oliver Kiddle]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2118 bytes --]

Sven Wischnowsky wrote:

> Yes, function moving and ordering before 4.0...

What you suggest for the basic stuff sounds good to me.

> The other stuff is harder to decide. _rpm, for example can also be
> useful on non-Linux systems. I don't know debian, but I guess the
> commands from that directory can be useful elsewhere, too. So maybe we
> should package the functions in a way that reflects what the commands
> do (network, package-managers, ...).

That is a bit more diffcult. I think I would prefer to stick to
directories which group together commands which users will generally
have all or none of as it is easier to specify whether you want a whole
directory than to pick and choose from specific commands taking each on
their own. I expect that it is fairly rare for someone to use rpm on
something other than Linux. Would there be problems involved in making
the installation of the functions intelligently only pick out
completions for commands which exist on the system?

> (And now Andrej comes and
> says that we should put all the GNU commands on the side... which
> wouldn't work with the ordering-by-what-they-do, of course. I still
> think there should be only one function per command and we try to find
> out what to complete by investigating the environment inside the
> functions.)

I agree with you on this. It keeps things all together better than if we
say had 10 different completions for the same command on different
systems so it is easier to make useful changes affect all the different
systems where they have commonality. It is common for GNU stuff to be
installed alongside originals, sometimes in a different directory and
sometimes with a different name and it would be important to me that
completion for these works.

I've attached my AIX specific completions. I haven't put them in cvs or
anything but when you (or whoever) come to sort out the directories, a
place could be found for them (and those FreeBSD ones someone sent
yesterday). I've actually got a few more AIX (and IRIX) completions but
they are very old (pre-_arguments) and could really do with a rewrite.

Oliver

[-- Attachment #2: Aixcomps.tgz --]
[-- Type: application/x-unknown-content-type-WinZip, Size: 1662 bytes --]

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Thomas Köhler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1849 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 11:19:50AM +0200,
Oliver Kiddle <opk@u.genie.co.uk> wrote:
> Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> 
> > Yes, function moving and ordering before 4.0...
> What you suggest for the basic stuff sounds good to me.
> > The other stuff is harder to decide. _rpm, for example can also be
> > useful on non-Linux systems. I don't know debian, but I guess the
> > commands from that directory can be useful elsewhere, too. So maybe we
> > should package the functions in a way that reflects what the commands
> > do (network, package-managers, ...).
> That is a bit more diffcult. I think I would prefer to stick to
> directories which group together commands which users will generally
> have all or none of as it is easier to specify whether you want a whole
> directory than to pick and choose from specific commands taking each on
> their own. I expect that it is fairly rare for someone to use rpm on
> something other than Linux. Would there be problems involved in making
> the installation of the functions intelligently only pick out
> completions for commands which exist on the system?

Well, yes. I'd see a problem if zsh wouldn't install ssh completion
because there is no ssh installed (just because someone forgot to
install it), ssh gets installed later, and the completion is not there.
(anything besides ssh may be used as an example)
One could argue "then do a make install again", but what about people
who are low on disk space and just have deleted the source tree again?
Download again. Bad.

CU,
Thomas

-- 
 Thomas Köhler Email:   jean-luc@picard.franken.de     | LCARS - Linux
     <><        WWW:     http://jeanluc-picard.de      | for Computers
                IRC:             jeanluc               | on All Real
               PGP public key available from Homepage! | Starships

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Completion function directories

[Bart Schaefer]

On Apr 20,  9:18am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors
}
} What I would like is a more logical ordering. I haven't really thought 
} about this yet, but maybe a Core with some of the functions it
} contains now [...]

I'd prefer that to be named something other than "Core" ...

} a directory with functions like _arguments (not really
} generating completions, only helping to add them), one directory with
} all those functions that generate a certain type of matches (options,
} jobs, pids, file-descriptors, etc.). And then certainly one for the
} builtin commands.

This sounds OK, too.  I also wonder whether we shouldn't move "compinit"
and related functions (anything not starting with an underscore, really)
up into the Completion directory itself.

} The other stuff is harder to decide. _rpm, for example can also be
} useful on non-Linux systems. I don't know debian, but I guess the
} commands from that directory can be useful elsewhere, too. So maybe we 
} should package the functions in a way that reflects what the commands
} do (network, package-managers, ...).

I don't think categorizing them that way is especially useful.  For one
thing, it means deciding on a list of categories, which is a potentially
deep rat-hole.  For another, it's no help when deciding which completions
to install; if I'm not going to install everything, then I'm probably
going to want all of the "networking" completions but only one of the
"package manager" completions, etc.  I'm not sure that it's even possible
to divide things up in a way that helps much with that, but the point is
to avoid making arbitrary divisions simply for the sake of dividing.

The main things I think we need are (1) to rename the Commands directory
(whatever meaning that name once had has long been lost on me) and (2)
break the User directory into two directories, one for helpers like
_user_at_host and _tilde_files and another for functions that handle
commands (which I think ought to be in a directory named Commands, but
what do I know).  And then if we're going to keep the system-specific
directories like AIX and even X, maybe we should subdivide them further
into the same two directories that we break User into, and eliminate
the system-specific level of hierarchy at install time.

So we'd end up with something like

Helpers  Commands  AIX/Helpers  AIX/Commands  Bsd/Helpers  Bsd/Commands
etc. etc.

(with probably a better name than "helpers").  Things like _diff_options
still end up in a fuzzy space, I know ...

On Apr 20, 10:19am, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors
}
} I think I would prefer to stick to directories which group together
} commands which users will generally have all or none of as it is
} easier to specify whether you want a whole directory than to pick
} and choose from specific commands taking each on their own. I expect
} that it is fairly rare for someone to use rpm on something other than
} Linux.

That's less true that it would have been even a few months ago -- and
even if it's still true, it's silly for _rpm to be the only thing in
the Linux directory.  Might as well give it back its own, or put it in
one named RedHat; after all, almost-but-not-quite everything in the
Debian directory is related to the Debian package management system.

My general feeling on that specific issue is that we shouldn't worry
about it too much -- the packagers of the various linux distributions
will pick the completions that are appropriate for their own dists when
they build their zsh RPMs or dpkgs or whatever, and their end users
will never know or care otherwise (in the main).  Any division we make
should be either for our benefit as developers or to assist packagers
in making the right choices.  (Further, note that we -could- use a
.distfiles-type mechanism or some such to make the install structure
differ from the distribution structure.)

Much earlier, Sven wrote:
} [...] Andrej comes and says that we should put all the GNU commands
} on the side...

This brings up a a question of whether we should have helper functions
for setting/testing the _is_gnu assoc, like happens now in _make and
_diff_options, or to set up the "standard completion environment" like
in _main_complete and _complete_help.  I thought briefly about doing
the latter, but then I noticed this problem:

    function unfortunate () {
	setopt NO_localoptions ...
    }
    function unsuspecting () {
	setopt localoptions ...
	unfortunate
    }

Unsetting localoptions in a nested function has some rather peculiar
effects depending on which options change state where.  It's not exactly
nondeterministic, but it surely can't be determined from the context of
the function that unsets localoptions, and probably not from the context
of the function that calls that other function.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

RE: Completion function directories

[Andrej Borsenkow]

>
> Much earlier, Sven wrote:
> } [...] Andrej comes and says that we should put all the GNU commands
> } on the side...
>
> This brings up a a question of whether we should have helper functions
> for setting/testing the _is_gnu assoc, like happens now in _make and
> _diff_options, or to set up the "standard completion environment" like
> in _main_complete and _complete_help.

I am not sure I understand what do you mean under "standard completion
environment" in this respect. I believe, in all cases when it is
possible we need automatic test for GNU utilities so, that completion
really works "out of the box". And only when it's not possible - last
resort like styles for particular command.



-andrej

Re: Completion function directories

[Bart Schaefer]

On Apr 27, 11:59am, Andrej Borsenkow wrote:
> Subject: RE: Completion function directories
> >
> > Much earlier, Sven wrote:
> > } [...] Andrej comes and says that we should put all the GNU commands
> > } on the side...
> >
> > This brings up a a question of whether we should have helper functions
> > for setting/testing the _is_gnu assoc, like happens now in _make and
> > _diff_options, or to set up the "standard completion environment" like
> > in _main_complete and _complete_help.
> 
> I am not sure I understand what do you mean under "standard completion
> environment" in this respect.

The two lines of setopts that have to appear at the top of each of several
of the completion functions to be sure all the globs and parameter refs
work as expected in all the rest of the functions those call.

My idea was to write a function:

    _standard_completer_setopts () {
	unsetopt localoptions	# This is the problem part
        setopt nullglob rcexpandparam extendedglob
        unsetopt markdirs globsubst shwordsplit nounset ksharrays
    }

Then there's only one place to edit if we ever need to change the setopts
used by all the completion scripts -- but the present unpredictable
behavior of `unsetopt localoptions' makes this idea unworkable.

> I believe, in all cases when it is
> possible we need automatic test for GNU utilities so, that completion
> really works "out of the box". And only when it's not possible - last
> resort like styles for particular command.

Following the same sort of suggestion as above, we'd have something like

    _detect_gnu () {
        (( $+_is_gnu )) || typeset -gA _is_gnu
        if (( ! $+_is_gnu[$1] ))
        then
                if [[ $(_call version "$@" </dev/null 2>/dev/null) = *GNU* ]]
                then
                        _is_gnu[$1]=yes 
                else
                        _is_gnu[$1]= 
                fi
        fi
	[[ $_is_gnu[$1] = yes ]]
    }

And then _make would use

	if _detect_gnu $words[1] -v -f /dev/null; then

and _diff_options would use

	if _detect_gnu $cmd -v; then

and so on for any other completion functions that needed to notice GNU.

PATCH: Spelling corrections in Etc/ files

[Oliver Kiddle]

I've fixed a few typos in some of the files in the Etc directory. I have
also removed the comment in the zsh-development-guide about how future
tests of interactive features may require external software like expect
because I would imagine that any such tests would now be done using
zpty. If anyone disagrees, I'll put the comment back.

On the subject of Completion function directories, Bart Schaefer wrote:

> And then if we're going to keep the system-specific
> directories like AIX and even X, maybe we should subdivide them further
> into the same two directories that we break User into, and eliminate
> the system-specific level of hierarchy at install time.
> 
> So we'd end up with something like
> 
> Helpers  Commands  AIX/Helpers  AIX/Commands  Bsd/Helpers  Bsd/Commands
> etc. etc.
> 
> (with probably a better name than "helpers").  Things like _diff_options
> still end up in a fuzzy space, I know ...

The completion-style-guide seems to refer to the `helpers' as utility
functions so 'Utilities' would be one suggestion for a different name. I
can't think of many other options though - thinking of similar things in
various programming languages: 'Generic', 'Library'.

I think your suggestion on how to reorganise the completion directories
is very good.

Oliver

Index: Etc/MACHINES
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Etc/MACHINES,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 MACHINES
--- Etc/MACHINES	2000/04/16 19:02:13	1.2
+++ Etc/MACHINES	2000/05/01 03:39:53
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@
 	Should build `out-of-the-box', but --enable-zsh-mem will not work.
 
 	On 3.2, for 64-bit integer support you need to compile with gcc, as
-	the native compiler does not support ANSI simulataneously with
+	the native compiler does not support ANSI simultaneously with
 	`long long'.  On 4.1, there appear to be problems using
 	--enable-dynamic (the default) with gcc (version was 2.7.2.3) in
 	4.1, though native cc works. More information about this problem
@@ -107,16 +107,16 @@
        and CDS/CDS++ compiler.
 
 SIEMENS: SINIX
-       MX (Intel) plattform: SINIX-L/M 5.41
+       MX (Intel) platform: SINIX-L/M 5.41
        Builds out-of-the-box with EGCS. Neither dynamic loading nor
-       64-bit integers are suported. Native compiler was not tried
+       64-bit integers are supported. Native compiler was not tried
        mostly because GCC/EGCS builds out-of-the-box as well. If you 
        succeed with native compiler, send a patch for this file
        to zsh-workers.
 
-       RM (MIPS) plattform: SINIX-N/Y 5.42
+       RM (MIPS) platform: SINIX-N/Y 5.42
        Should build out-of-the-box but it was not tested. Neither
-       dynamic loading nor 64-bit integers are suported.
+       dynamic loading nor 64-bit integers are supported.
        Note, that this version is obsolete and users are expected to 
        update to Reliant UNIX.
 
Index: Etc/NEWS
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Etc/NEWS,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 NEWS
--- Etc/NEWS	2000/04/30 21:04:55	1.2
+++ Etc/NEWS	2000/05/01 03:39:56
@@ -5,14 +5,14 @@
 New features in zsh version 3.1.7
 ---------------------------------
 Further enhancements to new completion system:
- - Comprehensive context-sensitive configuration vai `styles', which
-   can be set by the menu-driven front end in compinstall.
+ - Comprehensive context-sensitive configuration via `styles', which
+   can be set by the menu-driven front end in compinstall
  - General mechanism for setting patterns to be ignored in a completion;
    overriding  of patterns to be matched for functions
  - New completers: _prefix to complete word before cursor, _ignored
    to complete using words so far ignored (like $fignore but more
    powerful), _history to complete words from shell history
- - Multiple use of completers with different options, similalry splitting
+ - Multiple use of completers with different options, similarly splitting
    of different types of completion (`tags') so they are considered with
    different styles
  - Many more supplied completions for standard commands which work out of
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
    matches, e.g.
      [[ $foo = (#b)(*/)[^/]* ]]
    stores the part of $foo up to the last / in $match[1] and the indexes of
-   the match in $mbegin[1], $mend[1].  (#m) is also availabel to set $MATCH
+   the match in $mbegin[1], $mend[1].  (#m) is also available to set $MATCH
    to the entire match and corresponding $MBEGIN, $MEND:  useful in
    parameter substitutions like ${.../.../...}.
  - (#s) and (#e) match start and end of pattern like ^ and $ in regular
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@
    zsh subdirectory, so zle becomes zsh/zle etc.; aliases supplied for
    compatibility for existing code, but the new format should be used in
    future.
- - zmodload is more consistent between dynamicall and statically linked
+ - zmodload is more consistent between dynamically and statically linked
    shells
  - zsh/zftp and its function suite support multiple sessions (zfsession
    command); zftransfer allows transfer of files between two ftp sessions
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@
 -------------------------------
 
 Trailing "/" in a glob pattern now works like in other shell thus it
-can no longer be used as a sorthand for "(/)".
+can no longer be used as a shorthand for "(/)".
 
 Much improved sh/ksh emulation.  When zsh is invoked as sh it mostly
 conforms to POSIX 1003.2.
Index: Etc/completion-style-guide
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Etc/completion-style-guide,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -r1.4 completion-style-guide
--- Etc/completion-style-guide	2000/04/25 09:48:09	1.4
+++ Etc/completion-style-guide	2000/05/01 03:39:59
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 ---------------------------
 
 The completion system keeps track of the current context in the
-parameter `curcontext'. It's content is the hierarchical name for the
+parameter `curcontext'. Its content is the hierarchical name for the
 current context sans the `:completion:' and the last colon and the tag
 currently tried. The tags represent different types of matches. So,
 whenever you are about to add matches, you should use a tag for them
@@ -98,13 +98,13 @@
 
 The `_all_labels' function implements the loop over the tag aliases and
 handles the user-defined description, using (in the example) the
-parameter `expl' to store options to give to the command. These option 
+parameter `expl' to store options to give to the command. These options
 are inserted into the command line either directly before a single
 hyphen if there is such an argument or after the first word if there
-is no single hyphen. Since using `_all_labels' is so much more conveient
+is no single hyphen. Since using `_all_labels' is so much more convenient
 than writing the loop with the `_next_label' function (see below), but
-some function called to generate matches don't accept a single hyphen
-as argument anywhere but want the options built as their last arguments,
+some functions called to generate matches don't accept a single hyphen
+as an argument anywhere but want the options built as their last arguments,
 `_all_labels' will *replace* the hyphen with the options if the hyphen is
 the last argument. A good example for such a function is
 `_combination' which can be called like:
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@
   _tags friends users hosts
 
   while _tags; do
-    _requested friends expl friend compad alice bob && ret=0
+    _requested friends expl friend compadd alice bob && ret=0
     _requested users && _users && ret=0
     _requested hosts && _hosts && ret=0
 
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@
 For the names of the tags: choose simple (short, if at all possible)
 names in plural. Also, first have a look at the tag names already used 
 by other functions and if any of these names seem sensible for the
-type of matches you are about to add, the use those names. This will
+type of matches you are about to add, then use those names. This will
 allow users to define styles for certain types of matches independent
 of the place where they are added.
 
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@
 Users can associate patterns for hierarchical context names with
 certain styles using the `zstyle' builtin. The completion code
 should then use these styles to decide how matches should be added and 
-to get user-configured values. This, too,  is done using the builtin
+to get user-configured values. This, too, is done using the builtin
 `zstyle'.
 
 Basically styles map names to a bunch of strings (the `value'). In
@@ -327,7 +327,7 @@
   _description tag expl <descr>
   compadd "$expl@]" - <matches ...>
 
-Note that this function also accepts `-V' und `-J', optionally (in the 
+Note that this function also accepts `-V' and `-J', optionally (in the 
 same word) preceded by `1' or `2' to describe the type of group you
 want to use. For example:
 
@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@
     change the way these things will be completed everywhere by just using
     their own implementations for these functions.
 4)  Make sure that the return value of your functions is correct: zero
-    if matches where added and non-zero if no matches were found.
+    if matches were added and non-zero if no matches were found.
     In some cases you'll need to test the value of `$compstate[nmatches]'
     for this. This should always be done by first saving the old value
     (`local nm="$compstate[nmatches]"') and later comparing this with
@@ -397,7 +397,7 @@
     documentation for `_arguments' and `_values' for two functions
     that may help you with this.
 8)  If a completion function generates completely different types of
-    completions (for example, because the comamnd has several
+    completions (for example, because the command has several
     completely different modes), it should allow users to define
     functions that separately override the behavior for these
     different types. This can easily be achieved by using the
Index: Etc/zsh-development-guide
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Etc/zsh-development-guide,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 zsh-development-guide
--- Etc/zsh-development-guide	2000/04/06 16:44:03	1.2
+++ Etc/zsh-development-guide	2000/05/01 03:40:02
@@ -73,8 +73,7 @@
   tests for basic syntactic features, builtins, options etc. which you
   know to be flakey or to have had difficulties in the past.  Better
   support for testing job control and interactive features is expected
-  to follow eventually (this may require additional external software
-  e.g. `expect').
+  to follow eventually.
 
 * The directory is not part of the usual process of building and
   installation.  To run the tests, go to Test and `make check'.  Please
@@ -146,7 +145,7 @@
   The declaration itself should be all on one line (except for multi-line
   initialisers).
 
-* Preprocessor directives thst affect the function/variable declarations must
+* Preprocessor directives that affect the function/variable declarations must
   also be preceded by a "/**/" line, so that they get copied into the
   prototype lists.
 
@@ -178,12 +177,13 @@
 
 Each module is described by a file with a name ending in `.mdd' somewhere
 under the Src directory.  This file is actually a shell script that will
-sourced when zsh is build. To describe the module it can/should set the
+sourced when zsh is built. To describe the module it can/should set the
 following shell variables:
 
   - name            name of the module
   - moddeps         modules on which this module depends (default none)
-  - nozshdep        non-empty indicates no dependence on the `zsh/main' pseudo-module
+  - nozshdep        non-empty indicates no dependence on the `zsh/main'
+                    pseudo-module
   - alwayslink      if non-empty, always link the module into the executable
   - autobins        builtins defined by the module, for autoloading
   - autoinfixconds  infix condition codes defined by the module, for
@@ -361,7 +361,7 @@
     function is non-zero if the the num'th string from the array taken 
     as a glob pattern matches the given string.
 
-Registering and de-resgitering condition codes with the shell is
+Registering and de-registering condition codes with the shell is
 almost exactly the same as for builtins, using the functions
 `addconddefs()' and `deleteconddefs()' instead:
 
@@ -504,7 +504,7 @@
 `STRMATHFUNC' get the name of the function, the string between the
 parentheses at the call, and the last argument from the macro-call.
 
-Both types of functions return an mnumber which is a descriminated
+Both types of functions return an mnumber which is a discriminated
 union looking like:
 
   typedef struct {
@@ -737,7 +737,7 @@
   }
 
 Inside these wrapper functions the global variable `sfcontext' will be 
-set to a vlue indicating the circumstances under which the shell
+set to a clue indicating the circumstances under which the shell
 function was called. It can have any of the following values:
 
   - SFC_DIRECT:   the function was invoked directly by the user
@@ -758,13 +758,13 @@
 be unloaded immediately since the wrapper function is still on the
 call stack. The zsh code delays unloading modules until all wrappers
 from them have finished. To hide this from the user, the module's
-cleanup function is run immediatly so that all builtins, condition
+cleanup function is run immediately so that all builtins, condition
 codes, and wrapper function defined by the module are
 de-registered. But if there is some module-global state that has to be 
 finalized (e.g. some memory that has to be freed) and that is used by
 the wrapper functions finalizing this data in the cleanup function
 won't work.
-This is why ther are two functions each for the initialization and
+This is why there are two functions each for the initialization and
 finalization of modules. The `boot'- and `cleanup'-functions are run
 whenever the user calls `zmodload' or `zmodload -u' and should only
 register or de-register the module's interface that is visible to the
@@ -810,7 +810,7 @@
     `item()' list structure, then the instruction `nofill(...)', which
     simply turns off filling should be used; as with `indent(...)',
     explicit font changing commands are required.  This can be used
-    without `indent()' when no identation is required, e.g. if the
+    without `indent()' when no indentation is required, e.g. if the
     accumulated indentation would otherwise be too long.
   All the above should appear on their own, separated by newlines from the
   surrounding text.  No extra newlines after the opening or before the

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:

> Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> > 
> > The function moving will happen quite shortly before 4.0, I think. And
> > since I even added the BSD stuff, I think everyone should just go
> > ahead and add system specific completions like these (all functions
> > they think are fit to be exposed, that is). It might help us  to find
> > the best way for the final ordering, actually. I hope.
> 
> Okay, I've added the AIX completions. I've cited 10857 as the patch -
> there didn't seem any point in resending them in a proper patch although
> I actually made a few minor changes (using _wanted without &&).
> 
> What about completions for other applications which are not system
> specific but are not going to be of much use to most people. For
> example, I have a number of completions for Rational Apex commands.
> Maybe we could have an Apps directory which could contain further
> directories for such things as Apex and also things like rpm maybe?

I normally prefer flat directory structures but in this case: yes,
sounds good.

Hm, if the final version still looks the same we could also think
about Core/Main (_main_complete, _tags and friends), Core/Completer,
Core/Utility (for things like _arguments), Core/Foo (can't think of a
name; for _pids, _hosts, ...).

There are now already 245 completion functions. Whew.

Bye
 Sven


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

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Sven Wischnowsky]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:

> ...
> 
> > The other stuff is harder to decide. _rpm, for example can also be
> > useful on non-Linux systems. I don't know debian, but I guess the
> > commands from that directory can be useful elsewhere, too. So maybe we
> > should package the functions in a way that reflects what the commands
> > do (network, package-managers, ...).
> 
> That is a bit more diffcult. I think I would prefer to stick to
> directories which group together commands which users will generally
> have all or none of as it is easier to specify whether you want a whole
> directory than to pick and choose from specific commands taking each on
> their own. I expect that it is fairly rare for someone to use rpm on
> something other than Linux.

The folks around here use rpm even under Solaris...

> Would there be problems involved in making
> the installation of the functions intelligently only pick out
> completions for commands which exist on the system?

For one, the update thing Thomas mentioned. And then people may have
different paths, the net may be heterogeneous...

> ...
> 
> I've attached my AIX specific completions. I haven't put them in cvs or
> anything but when you (or whoever) come to sort out the directories, a
> place could be found for them (and those FreeBSD ones someone sent
> yesterday). I've actually got a few more AIX (and IRIX) completions but
> they are very old (pre-_arguments) and could really do with a rewrite.

The function moving will happen quite shortly before 4.0, I think. And 
since I even added the BSD stuff, I think everyone should just go
ahead and add system specific completions like these (all functions
they think are fit to be exposed, that is). It might help us  to find
the best way for the final ordering, actually. I hope.

Bye
 Sven


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

Re: PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Oliver Kiddle]

Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> 
> The function moving will happen quite shortly before 4.0, I think. And
> since I even added the BSD stuff, I think everyone should just go
> ahead and add system specific completions like these (all functions
> they think are fit to be exposed, that is). It might help us  to find
> the best way for the final ordering, actually. I hope.

Okay, I've added the AIX completions. I've cited 10857 as the patch -
there didn't seem any point in resending them in a proper patch although
I actually made a few minor changes (using _wanted without &&).

What about completions for other applications which are not system
specific but are not going to be of much use to most people. For
example, I have a number of completions for Rational Apex commands.
Maybe we could have an Apps directory which could contain further
directories for such things as Apex and also things like rpm maybe?

Oliver

PATCH: completion for file descriptors

[Oliver Kiddle]

Here is the completion for file descriptors which was discussed during
the day along with a few small changes to _print to use it and to handle
-p only when the is a coprocess. Can anyone see any problems or
alternatives to my fallback method of finding links of using ls -l piped
into sed? The stat module works well but I didn't want to use it if it
wasn't loaded because it isn't there by default. On IRIX, I seem to get
all 10 file descriptors listed regardless and I can't see a way round
it, not that it matters much. If put _file_descriptors in Core because
it will be used by _redirect and because other things like _options is
there - it can always be moved.

Oliver

Index: Completion/Builtins/_print
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/zsh/zsh/Completion/Builtins/_print,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -r1.1 _print
3c3
< local state expl line eflag
---
> local state expl line eflag pflag
7a8,11
> # -p flag only relevant if we have a coprocess
> (:>&p) 2>/dev/null &&
>   pflag='(-s -u -z)-p[print arguments to input of coprocess]'
> 
21,22c25
<   '(-s -p -z)-u+[specify file-descriptor to print arguments to]:file-descritor' \
<   '(-s -u -z)-p[print arguments to input of coprocess]' \
---
>   '(-s -p -z)-u+[specify file-descriptor to print arguments to]:file-descriptor:_file_descriptors' \
26c29
<   $eflag '*:default:_default'
---
>   $pflag $eflag '*:default:_default'
Index: Completion/Core/_file_descriptors
===================================================================
RCS file: _file_descriptors
diff -N _file_descriptors
0a1,23
> #autoload
> 
> local i fds expl list link
> 
> for i in {0..9}; [[ -e /dev/fd/$i ]] && fds=( ${fds[@]} $i )
> 
> if zstyle -T ":completion:${curcontext}" verbose && [[ -e /proc/$$/fd ]]; then
>   if zmodload -e zsh/stat; then
>     for i in "${fds[@]}"; do
>       stat +link -A link /proc/$$/fd/$i
>       list=( ${list[@]} "$i -- ${link[1]}" )
>     done
>   elif (( $+commands[readlink] )); then
>     for i in "${fds[@]}"; list=( ${list[@]} "$i -- $(readlink /proc/$$/fd/$i)" )
>   else
>     for i in "${fds[@]}"; do
>       list=( ${list[@]} "$i -- $(ls -l /proc/$$/fd/$i|sed 's/.*-> //' )" )
>     done
>   fi
>   _wanted file-descriptors expl 'file descriptors' compadd "$@" -d list - "$fds[@]"  
> else
>   _wanted file-descriptors expl 'file descriptors' compadd "$@" - "$fds[@]"
> fi