From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18861 invoked from network); 23 Jul 1999 15:54:38 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 23 Jul 1999 15:54:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 16681 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 1999 15:54:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7267 Received: (qmail 16674 invoked from network); 23 Jul 1999 15:54:27 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <990723155418.ZM9736@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:54:18 +0000 In-Reply-To: <37974CCF.9BFC3FF9@u.genie.co.uk> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "Re: PATCH: _functions for "functions"" (Jul 22, 5:54pm) References: <37974CCF.9BFC3FF9@u.genie.co.uk> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: _functions for "functions" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 22, 5:54pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote: } Subject: Re: PATCH: _functions for "functions" } } Bart Schaefer wrote: } } > [...] it seems silly not to complete anything at all for ["functions"]. } } Exactly the same is applicable for aliases. Not quite true, since with "functions" you can't define anything, all you can do is print what you already have. With "alias" the chances are pretty good that you're creating something from scratch and don't really want one of the existing names -- in fact, it might make more sense to complete command names on the assumption that you want the alias to override one. That isn't necessarily an objection to using your patch in the meantime. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com