From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5768 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2000 15:34:26 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (HELO sunsite.auc.dk) (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Nov 2000 15:34:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 5925 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2000 15:34:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13126 Received: (qmail 5918 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2000 15:34:20 -0000 Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 10:34:08 -0500 Message-Id: <200011061534.KAA29444@soup.ads.apexinc.com> X-Authentication-Warning: soup.ads.apexinc.com: ejb set sender to ejb@apexinc.com using -f From: "E. Jay Berkenbilt" To: wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de CC: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: <200010250750.JAA23801@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> (message from Sven Wischnowsky on Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:50:04 +0200 (MET DST)) Subject: Re: still confused about completion and matching References: <200010250750.JAA23801@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I've been using zsh from the repository with the patches that enabled my fancy glob completion behavior for a few weeks now and I have had no problems with that or any other aspect of completion behavior. I get a little thrill every time I type a shell regexp and hit TAB now. :-) It seems that the changes have still not been committed to the repository. Is this because we're still waiting for reactions from people who are not using the new patches or because we forgot or for some other reason? The part of me that is sending this message is the part that monitors for unresolved issues and yearns for the day when I can use an unpatched zsh. :-) I still haven't had time to write my smbclient completion function. I've also added rewriting _rcs to use _arguments to my "eventually" list unless someone else gets to it first. As brought up by another user (Vincent Lefevre) the current behavior doesn't handle the more subtle aspects of rcs's behavior very well. I've run into this several times myself either when looking at RCS directories that are really on Windows machines or using rcs commands directly to cheat while looking at CVS repositories. I think I know rcs well enough to (with the help of the rcs manual pages of course) rewrite _rcs.... Jay