Re: Size of select listing?

[Oliver Kiddle <opk@u.genie.co.uk>]

Andrej Borsenkow wrote:

> patch TAB
> 
> creates a select listing longer than screen size. At least, if I do it in a
> directory with ~ 15 files.
> 
> bor@itsrm2:~%> patch
> --backup                  --reverse                 -i
> --backup-if-mismatch      --set-time                -l
> . . .
> --quoting-style           -e                        tmp/
> --reject-file             -f                        xxxx/
> --remove-empty-files      -g

It doesn't so much relate to handling the screen size but, one area
which I really don't like about the way _arguments and _long_options
work is the way options are considered possible matches straight-away. I
don't like the mixed file and option lists as above because 9 times out
of 10 I don't care what the options to a particular command are and if I
do, I'll have typed the minus already. The way I've always written
compctls (and the way the compctl-examples are done), is that options
are only completed after an initial minus has been typed and long
options, only after an initial two minuses. I also think it is better if
the minus signs are not displayed in the lists so as to save a bit more
screen space - I don't think they add to the readability at all. In
summary, I think that patch <tab> should list and complete file names
only, patch -<tab> should complete options and should display them
without the initial '-' and patch --<tab> should list only the long
options (unless we have filenames starting with '-') without displaying
'--' before every option. This way of doing things would reduce the
number of things which get listed.

I'd write a patch for _arguments/_long_options for this but I suspect
people might disagree with me and because they have both become quite
complicated so it'd take me a while.

Oliver Kiddle