From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4579 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 19:52:47 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 19:52:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 2247 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2004 19:52:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 19777 Received: (qmail 2231 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 19:52:37 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO sunsite.dk) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 19:52:37 -0000 X-MessageWall-Score: 0 (sunsite.dk) Received: from [130.225.247.86] by sunsite.dk (MessageWall 1.0.8) with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 19:52:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 31600 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2004 19:52:35 -0000 Received: from cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk (195.92.193.211) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 14 Apr 2004 19:52:33 -0000 Received: from modem-147.new-jersey.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.137.81.147] helo=pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk) by cmailm4.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BDqQy-0005qY-B3 for zsh-workers@sunsite.dk; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:52:32 +0100 Received: by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 501) id CF83B85BC; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:55:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB6185AF for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:55:51 +0100 (BST) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: Compsys and KSH_AUTOLOAD In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of "Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:44:30 -0000." <1040410174430.ZM10891@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:55:50 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Message-Id: <20040414195551.CF83B85BC@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=6.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Hits: 1.5 Bart Schaefer wrote: > (1) Does this deserve a FAQ entry, or perhaps even a change to the > compsys documentation? I guess ksh_autoload isn't a very "frequently" > used option, but even the existing paragraph in the manual about it not > working is pretty deeply buried. It's already documented, fairly well down the manual page. Note also that the functions for the completion system assume that the KSH_AUTOLOAD option is not set. They cannot be loaded if it is set. To avoid having to unset KSH_AUTOLOAD, you can instead use one or more zwc file(s) that have been created with the command zcompile −z to load the functions for the completion system; see zshbuiltins(1). This forces the functions to be autoloaded the way zsh normally loads func‐tions. > (2) Should we change _comp_options to always include NO_kshautoload? Seems sensible, in view of the above. -- Peter Stephenson Work: pws@csr.com Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk