From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18117 invoked from network); 5 Mar 1999 13:24:25 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Mar 1999 13:24:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 22471 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 1999 13:24:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 5661 Received: (qmail 22463 invoked from network); 5 Mar 1999 13:24:03 -0000 Message-Id: <9903051308.AA35345@ibmth.df.unipi.it> To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: Shuld it be so? and Re: _tar In-Reply-To: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Fri, 05 Mar 1999 14:06:28 NFT." <199903051306.OAA04169@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 14:08:07 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > How do you folks using menucompletion complete consecutive path > components (normal, existing paths, without _path_files), btw? I have ^Z bound to something which inserts a character then deletes when I get to the right directory. It's something of a hack, but it saves me having (*shudder*) to type letters in path names. If I didn't use menu completion, I'd have to *read* what was in the directory instead of blindly typing tab. Actually, I tend to type the first part and then use ^D until I have a small enough list. Rather than type, get partial completion, look at list, type, get partial completion... I can just type a few letters and go BAM BAM BAM BAM with the tab key, which is very satsifying. Well, relatively speaking. > (But I would > think that with menucompletion keeping the list small is even more > important, isn't it?) Yes, I would say so. -- Peter Stephenson Tel: +39 050 844536 WWW: http://www.ifh.de/~pws/ Dipartimento di Fisica, Via Buonarroti 2, 56127 Pisa, Italy