From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu>
Received: (qmail 196 invoked from network); 3 Jul 1998 19:49:43 -0000
Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 3 Jul 1998 19:49:43 -0000
Received: (from list@localhost)
	by math.gatech.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA23876;
	Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-Id: <980703123348.ZM23977@candle.brasslantern.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 12:33:48 -0700
In-Reply-To: <199807010613.IAA21953@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de>
Comments: In reply to Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
        "Re: Compctl completion tweaking" (Jul  1,  8:13am)
References: <199807010613.IAA21953@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail Lite (5.0.0 30July97)
To: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>,
        zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Subject: Re: Compctl completion tweaking
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"b1HNt.0._q5.F7Jdr"@math>
Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
X-Mailing-List: <zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu> archive/latest/4201
X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu

On Jul 1,  8:13am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> Subject: Re: Compctl completion tweaking
> 
> First, I would try to change the behaviour of -P (and -S) so that they 
> are not inserted straight away, but instead [...], the prefixes
> are walked through, too [....]

This sounds to me rather like the behavior of compctl -U.  Perhaps the
use of inclusive-or should simply imply, or require pairing with, -U ?

> More problematic is the case where
> we have prefixes like, say `barrr' and `bazzz'. The completion code
> would insert the `ba' [...]
> but without completeinword (and without automenu), the user
> would have to type `rrr' or `zzz' which is a bit ugly.

That's no worse than what happens without a prefix when completing in
the middle of a word that happens to match more than one result, is it?

> So, does this seem to make sense?

Mostly, but as with most completion stuff it's probably necessary to see
it in action.