From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14179 invoked from network); 20 Feb 1999 10:55:19 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 20 Feb 1999 10:55:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 2102 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 1999 10:45:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 5433 Received: (qmail 317 invoked from network); 19 Feb 1999 15:09:18 -0000 Message-Id: <9902191453.AA11538@ibmth.df.unipi.it> To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: 3.1.5-pws-8: using pattern completions In-Reply-To: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:12:33 NFT." <199902191112.MAA10908@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:53:31 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > - Due to getting the patterns automatically from the files they are > not sorted. This may be an argument in favor of the simplified > processing I used in the `Comp' example directory. But isn't that simply because there's now no way to handle patterns? That doesn't seem to me an advantage. I don't like Functions/Comp as it stands, because there's no way of automatically defining the relationship between a $COMMAND and a __function, so I haven't tested it out properly. I very much prefer a modular system, which can handle one file per command (or even per suite of commands), otherwise it makes altering the system and tracking what's going on just too difficult. This is for me one of the major advantages of the new completion system: a single file can replace a ragbag of initialisations and functions. I'm quite happy with having some notion of context built in alongside this. We already have things a bit like that with helpers like __files providing common completions for particular contexts. > - We probably should also completely remove the completion-array-handling. > This would make the code much cleaner, would allow us to get rid of > the callcomplete-trampoline, and would allow us to call dump anytime. Yes, I was wondering about this. Having a lot of autoloaded functions just call complist isn't so much worse than than having all the baggage for handling variables, and this time the simplification would certainly make the interface no less powerful. Also, we keep particular completions within the functions namespace and avoid the variables namespace except for special usage. So I'm in favour. I'll put the new version (which has now arrived) in pws-9. The directory will still be Functions/Completion . -- Peter Stephenson Tel: +39 050 844536 WWW: http://www.ifh.de/~pws/ Dipartimento di Fisica, Via Buonarroti 2, 56127 Pisa, Italy