From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9294 invoked from network); 16 May 2000 07:59:02 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 16 May 2000 07:59:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 22803 invoked by alias); 16 May 2000 07:58:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 11400 Received: (qmail 22796 invoked from network); 16 May 2000 07:58:52 -0000 Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 09:58:38 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200005160758.JAA19581@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Tue, 16 May 2000 06:28:18 +0000 Subject: Re: Styles that aren't :completion:* ... Bart Schaefer wrote: > I notice that the nslookup function uses a context of ':nslookup', whereas > assorted zftp components use ":zftp$curcontext". Yes, but it's not the completion-$curcontext, it's the zftp-one. > Yet incremental-complete-word uses ":completion:incremental${curcontext#*:}" > and similarly insert-and-predict uses ":completion:predict${curcontext#*:}". > So these functions actually strip off part of the context and replace it. I considered i-complete-w to be a completion thing. And since in completion it uses `:completion:incremental:...' I thought it would be easier to understand if it used that for all styles. But yes, now that I think of it again, maybe it it should look up its own styles with `:incremental'. And the same for `:predict'. Because... > What's the idiom supposed to be, again? (although this was never really defined; maybe we should do that and write it down in the devel-guide) ... something like: every `system' uses its own prefix and whatever hierarchy it needs below that. Not a very exact description, I'm afraid. > Here's the specific reason that I ask: I'm thinking of adding some more > styles to predict-on/off and to the functions they bind to keystrokes. For > example, there's a comment in delete-backward-and-predict to the effect > that some people might prefer that it call predict-off. That seems like > an ideal thing to control with a style, but it feels funny to use a style > that starts with ":completion:" because no completion is happening during > delete-backward-and-predict. Right. > Similarly I was thinking of adding a "verbose" style to predict-on, to have > it call "zle -M" when prediction goes into effect. That's called directly > from a keystroke. What's the context? `:predict', I'd say. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de