From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 158 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2000 11:18:47 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 4 Feb 2000 11:18:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 11325 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2000 11:18:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9563 Received: (qmail 11317 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2000 11:18:40 -0000 Message-ID: <389AB589.5B0560AA@u.genie.co.uk> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 11:18:33 +0000 From: Oliver Kiddle X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Zsh workers Subject: Re: A couple of completion problems References: <200002041055.LAA23286@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > So, what do you all think: should we make all automatically found > options take their argument as being optional? Should we leave it to > the calling functions? Or should we add a style that can be used to > give a set of patterns and all options with matching names have their > argument turned into an optional one? So how would _arguments behave differently if the argument to the long option is optional? My thinking is that the behaviour should be the same anyway: command --foo should insert an '=' which is auto-removed by a further space command --foo= should complete the arguments to the foo option command --foo the space (and lack of '=') surely means that we have moved on from the foo option and should be completing other options. If the argument to --foo is mandatory, then that's the user's problem for not specifying it. By continuing to try to complete arguments to --foo, zsh is going to achieve nothing. I've probably missed the point somewhere though. Thanks Oliver