From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2104 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 08:44:16 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 08:44:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 8023 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2003 08:44:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 19092 Received: (qmail 8013 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 08:44:09 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 08:44:09 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [217.174.194.138] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 8:44:9 -0000 Received: from DervishD.pleyades.net (212.Red-80-35-44.pooles.rima-tde.net [80.35.44.212]) by madrid10.amenworld.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h8H8i6i10105; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:44:06 +0200 Received: from raul@pleyades.net by DervishD.pleyades.net with local (Exim MTA 2.05) id <19zXou-00019m-00>; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:37:52 +0200 Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:37:52 +0200 From: DervishD To: Oliver Kiddle Cc: Zsh Subject: Re: Tags in function files Message-ID: <20030917083752.GC4415@DervishD> Mail-Followup-To: Oliver Kiddle , Zsh References: <20030916203559.GA2160@DervishD> <18188.1063784897@gmcs3.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <18188.1063784897@gmcs3.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Pleyades User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Hi Oliver :) * Oliver Kiddle dixit: > > and #autoload), are hardcoded in Zsh or is the new completion system > > who parses it? I mean, can I use those tags in my shell scripts > > without using the new completion system? > It is the compinit shell function which parses them. So it is just the > new completion system and not anything hardcoded into zsh. OK, thanks :) BTW, the special parameters as 'words' and the like, are too created and initialized by compinit (I mean, the new completion system...)? $words doesn't seem to work, so I'm thinking about using 'BUFFER' for command line parsing in order to call one of the completion functions I need. Like _main_complete, but lots simpler. > You can use them in your own shell scripts if you really want. You might > regret it if you start using the new completion system later though so > it might be wiser to use a different word in your tags. I take note, thanks :))) Anyway I was asking just for avoiding explicit calls to 'compdef', but I noticed that compdef is just a function defined by compinit!, so I cannot use it. No problem anyway. Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/