invisible option completions?

invisible option completions?

[Jason McCarty]

Is it possible with _arguments or some other way to have options that
can be completed, but aren't displayed on the screen as possible
completions? I'd like something like
  _arguments \
    '(-o)--output[save output in DIR]:DIR:_files -/' \
    '(--output)-o:DIR:_files -/'
but where -o doesn't clutter the screen. I know that zsh 4.2 would
display -o nicely beside --output if I gave it the same explanation, but
I'd like to support 4.0 as well. Any suggestions?

-- 
Jason McCarty <bclg@iup.edu>

Re: invisible option completions?

[Oliver Kiddle]

Jason McCarty wrote:
> Is it possible with _arguments or some other way to have options that
> can be completed, but aren't displayed on the screen as possible
> completions? I'd like something like
>   _arguments \
>     '(-o)--output[save output in DIR]:DIR:_files -/' \
>     '(--output)-o:DIR:_files -/'
> but where -o doesn't clutter the screen. I know that zsh 4.2 would
> display -o nicely beside --output if I gave it the same explanation, but
> I'd like to support 4.0 as well. Any suggestions?

If you put an exclamation mark before the option description, it won't
be displayed (or completed) but it will still handle the argument:
   '!(--output)-o:DIR:_files -/'

If you want the options to actually be completed too (such as if you
are hiding long option names), then use compadd with the `-n' option.
This won't hide them from menu-selection:
  compadd -n -- -o

Oliver

[resolved] invisible option completions?

[Jason McCarty]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:
> If you put an exclamation mark before the option description, it won't
> be displayed (or completed) but it will still handle the argument:
>    '!(--output)-o:DIR:_files -/'

That's exactly what I was looking for, thanks!

-- 
Jason McCarty <bclg@iup.edu>