From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7647 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 07:15:05 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 29 Jun 2001 07:15:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 27966 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2001 07:14:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 15175 Received: (qmail 27952 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 07:14:13 -0000 From: Sven Wischnowsky Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:13:00 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200106290713.JAA30726@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: Picky criticism of ls completion list formatting In-Reply-To: <1010629023538.ZM8673@candle.brasslantern.com> Bart Schaefer wrote: > ... [completion listing layout] It's all as it should be, including this one: > With > > listpacked on > listtypes on > > I *still* get equally-sized columns with three spaces between. because it depends on the completion strings. If the listing code finds out that packing the list doesn't decrease the number of lines needed, it uses equally sized columns in the hope that they are better readable. Try it with: % setopt listtypes listpacked % touch a12345678901234567890{a,b,c,d} b12{a,b,c,d} % ls and you'll see that the listing code can sometimes even increase the number of spaces between columns if it can do so without needing more lines (it currently does that only if it can give the same number of spaces to each column). And a `btw': with coloured completion listings setting list_types isn't really needed anymore, so the original poster may think about unsetting it. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de