Re: completion in vared

["Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@brasslantern.com>]

On Apr 30,  9:07am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
} Subject: Re: completion in vared
}
} 
} Bart Schaefer wrote:
} > By the way, if we're reasonably confident that we've now identified all
} > the compctl-isms that it's useful to put into compadd/gen/etc., I think
} > we should seriously look at rewriting the option parsing for those new
} > commands to abandon the compctl syntax.
} 
} I /think/ you are referring to an old suggestion to just give a
} builtin that gets the matches to be added directly (that would be
} compadd) and let the user generate these matches/words through shell
} code.

No, I'm mostly thinking of the compctl options that have poor mnemonics,
and particularly of -J and -V (which are begging for a bracketed-looking
syntax).

There is some advantage to having the options of the new commands be the
same as those of compctl, but I'm not sure if it's enough to outweigh the
opportunity to clean it up a bit.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com