From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from primenet.com.au (ns1.primenet.com.au [203.24.36.2]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 6ee4e467 for ; Tue, 7 May 2019 00:11:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 2139 invoked by alias); 7 May 2019 00:11:07 -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: List-Unsubscribe: X-Seq: 44276 Received: (qmail 6086 invoked by uid 1010); 7 May 2019 00:11:07 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-it1-f170.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.101.2/25440. spamassassin: 3.4.2. Clear:RC:0(209.85.166.170):SA:0(-1.9/5.0):. Processed in 3.524403 secs); 07 May 2019 00:11:07 -0000 X-Envelope-From: dana@dana.is X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at _netblocks.google.com designates 209.85.166.170 as permitted sender) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dana-is.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kSFTtd0d0oieRvtUDRzFdTDxqMuTVqneuRg8xUVO20Y=; b=VQuwH3OzJZxjEM07oisWJVbyqa2RyzFlmaixAiyu90eqrQ27cTHum2Aziu2aRAmXw8 VH44lf6y1mQiAXJlKLMghyzyntnm+NMaLQdgZOsu3zGiiv8jkzLCjZjKxf+/7sBT/sEC pc9RlJde2ai/jhzCpapTxMdDNb42vY1YYmUbkCq7TpB/qOoEXpcfm1+KSGEw8iKT26rB MoFSHZ6AvtPRIGcNX0Fhrt3AEYA83ylX7JvlPx0l2G7gdSTbVz/4LHUHoGYLFP6lYLnD QSi1eyf384LJts51DABRQBIjGDYwVf9wDGs2cSvIL3t54wcNuN8ctCP28x77d4WuF7os ffXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kSFTtd0d0oieRvtUDRzFdTDxqMuTVqneuRg8xUVO20Y=; b=gYK4qaQ8BQzEDCAEGuHBsAPZ0tOOCeVD4EOH0wgKYaqNWofjerlFAgpcdTKP6pePY0 F1nXmeu7qEG6U4STH3K3SK46ACTb/TuPUJOr4g00rLkjDTgoQ4SH8SsnL3YVy66XsIzM gEgo8uZ0uPdfA4pOzJLmm9fdNF3FOMgH/+AfWpLcPbyDP78bZ5mpiVm/xf7eGYvm/VVk srsj8ry1C99ZXMOpw2QQYHxcKrIug9qWThXd8ujrJv6B3OrEL9fyOHB2omOUfbv5Ie0t 7x0+lHpzY5Rq87yyJd4CX7PM0PN9hbqhrO2yftB0Fngd8KRhaaIHkj/pljWN/wzJJpcU 1lCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWz8xpJr2h28KgazF9DsBoOOxLqKH7GrE7rZt70Ch4ay/HfJ5TO n8S2eMMfUHIl8qv3USq6UPwdfC4V2koKRQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwwVQCWh3I62fmMez2+cXb0zGoqCSn+xW7RHkouVk2KOiaCe2nZcUlyG0K3LQce5VX6Px8yCw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:6c54:: with SMTP id w81mr20129589itb.78.1557187831532; Mon, 06 May 2019 17:10:31 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Subject: Re: PATCH: completion match ordering From: dana In-Reply-To: <93343-1557177371.866119@fZLB.yW79.IWgX> Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 19:10:30 -0500 Cc: Zsh workers Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <693EF72F-D53C-429F-9B0C-C44BB19AB1DB@dana.is> References: <75B26F45-E6E6-44BB-80A4-7301CBE480FE@dana.is> <88812-1541586959.338018@YaNA.ZOZt.NKaA> <76839-1543195550.251964@c6AU.RX4q.p78d> <93343-1557177371.866119@fZLB.yW79.IWgX> To: Oliver Kiddle X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) On 6 May 2019, at 16:16, Oliver Kiddle wrote: > I finally got around to finishing off the changes to the options for = completion > match ordering via compadd -o. Thanks to dana for reminding me about = this. Thank you! Your matchcmp() update removes SORTIT_IGNORING_BACKSLASHES entirely =E2=80= =94 is that deliberate in light of my changes? It should always make sense to skip back-slashes in completion matches unless `compadd -Q` is used to bypass escaping, shouldn't it? Or do i misunderstand? (If it is deliberate, the test i added =E2=80=94 which causes a conflict = with this patch, btw =E2=80=94 will fail until some replacement is devised) dana