From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23534 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2016 16:18:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 38997 Received: (qmail 20336 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2016 16:18:23 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(210.118.77.12):SA:0(-1.3/5.0):. Processed in 0.130832 secs); 04 Aug 2016 16:18:23 -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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: p.stephenson@samsung.com X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at samsung.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-f792a6d000001302-5b-57a3686c5995 Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 17:08:09 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3(b)/3] _man: Support _correct_word. Message-id: <20160804170809.0f972f07@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> In-reply-to: <1470326066-3241-5-git-send-email-danielsh@tarsus.local2> References: <1470326066-3241-1-git-send-email-danielsh@tarsus.local2> <1470326066-3241-5-git-send-email-danielsh@tarsus.local2> 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/xK7o5GYvDDfbsUbI42PyQyYHRY9XB D0wBjFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGYvWnWAr+MRSsXbBN6YGxv/MXYycHBICJhJ/2udA2WISF+6t Z+ti5OIQEljKKHH77DUWCGcGk0T73ZtsIFVCAqcZJX59zIBInGGU6G94AJZgEVCVWDqxCWwU m4ChxNRNsxlBbBEBcYmza8+zgNjCAhYSExdMBrN5Bewlfr3fzdrFyMHBKeAmcXdeLsTMRkaJ GXuWMYHU8AvoS1z9+4kJ4jx7iZlXzjBC9ApK/Jh8D2wOs4CWxOZtTawQtrzE5jVvmSEOVZe4 cXc3+wRG4VlIWmYhaZmFpGUBI/MqRtHU0uSC4qT0XCO94sTc4tK8dL3k/NxNjJBw/rqDcekx q0OMAhyMSjy8CrGLw4VYE8uKK3MPMUpwMCuJ8LrFAYV4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8xSnOwKInz ztz1PkRIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgmy8TBKdXAuEClfVGL+fvMx6d+xyxnlQl7kVFSJ1o0b9Ld/pD5 h58JX/l+aKlO6Rz3LZZhYb9MlX+vqdJ7aO+alP6rK3mLfFyE6d87OjeOvXuTedmo7ACPZrfq X2sby55J33sd2a/n+sy1ae8ybrC529tz6vCpZRZHWIXbQ3ZNd1L5ZLgo+fY36RQv34uOSizF GYmGWsxFxYkAoUitj2MCAAA= On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 15:54:26 +0000 Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Since compfiles is undocumented, avoid its use altogether, replacing it by > a construct that blackbox analysis suggests to be equivalent. This is likely to be saner, if it works. compfiles was written to replace an uncocumented chunk of _path_files with an equivalently undocumented chunk of optimised C. If you actually need more features of file completion, which you probably don't as the user doesn't ultimately see the result as a file match, going through _path_files would probably be less insane than compfiles. pws