From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-38722-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 1795 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2016 15:10:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 38722
Received: (qmail 1293 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2016 15:10:40 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-f792a6d000001302-bf-5768076b70da
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:10:33 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: allow default match specs to be disabled (was Re: [PATCH
 v4] zsh localedef completion)
Message-id: <20160620161033.4fac0205@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <15696.1466432007@thecus.kiddle.eu>
References: <57504DEC.9000101@redhat.com>
 <2aa4c678-6d5e-0614-7aff-e374c3108ba3@gmx.com>
 <5312.1465896712@thecus.kiddle.eu>
 <fc6b9fc8-e37f-1756-ed08-c87d5ffd7317@gmx.com>
 <23451.1466284625@thecus.kiddle.eu>
 <160619091803.ZM1176@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <15696.1466432007@thecus.kiddle.eu>
Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker:
 H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrALMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xK7rZ7BnhBnemWlscbH7I5MDoserg
	B6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujNs7T7AU3GWqONZ6j6WBcQpTFyMnh4SAicTGqz8YIWwxiQv3
	1rN1MXJxCAksZZTo/vaZCcKZwSSx8/ZtVgjnHKPEtjlzoZyzjBJLL08Fcjg4WARUJX5ONQQZ
	xSZgKDF102ywsSIC4hJn155nAbGFBXIk9nRuZAYp5xWwl3i4xAMkzClgIHHlxyOoZauZJKY+
	Xg52Hr+AvsTVv5+gTrWXmHnlDNhMXgFBiR+T74HNZBbQkti8rYkVwpaX2LzmLTOILSSgLnHj
	7m72CYzCs5C0zELSMgtJywJG5lWMoqmlyQXFSem5RnrFibnFpXnpesn5uZsYIeH8dQfj0mNW
	hxgFOBiVeHgtzqaFC7EmlhVX5h5ilOBgVhLhnfE/PVyINyWxsiq1KD++qDQntfgQozQHi5I4
	78xd70OEBNITS1KzU1MLUotgskwcnFINjL0/tPc9OmL54Pem9qk+P1ZMmGCqkeTqzl+T/11z
	VkL7vgCNSQ+2v5uXstBB+b4Y00LPY8wzXHY7uMcvEmIMrGd84f/37Rr9K/MnK5frFaywNJu8
	dvWEpXt5z7z/yv/HVdPqil3jm5zzCdKCYUsOaArpLrzpJTsx/vyE8uW2ydNCQl9lBrz6uU+J
	pTgj0VCLuag4EQDaIwETYwIAAA==

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:13:27 +0200
Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> But within an argument, can the order of the various r: and m: specs
> matter? I'm fairly sure the answer is no.

I think this is well into undocumented behaviour that a user might be
well advised not to find out about by creating specs where it matters.

pws