From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7518 invoked from network); 1 Sep 1999 14:30:30 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 1 Sep 1999 14:30:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 1099 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 1999 14:30:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7612 Received: (qmail 934 invoked from network); 1 Sep 1999 14:30:15 -0000 Message-Id: <9909011356.AA13286@ibmth.df.unipi.it> To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: completion functions (was: 6-pws-2) In-Reply-To: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Wed, 01 Sep 1999 15:19:14 DFT." <199909011319.PAA01079@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 15:56:11 +0200 From: Peter Stephenson Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > With a little help from `awk' this was relatively easy to build, so I > thought I just try to make us make a decision. > > This is `User/_pbm' again, but containing mostly the stuff from the > `Pbmplus/*' files. I like it this way --- particularly since it replaces a 100 functions, and you can compare the different behaviour for each function just by looking through the one file. Does anyone have anything to say for the other way, before I delete the Pbmplus subdirectory? Also, would it help to add a comment pointing out you can override individual completions by defining an appropriate function? (By the way, mail is still screwed up here. I've reported it but it usually takes a month or two of arguing to get anyone to do anything, by which time I won't be here. So please keep sending personal mail to pws@ifh.de until I say otherwise.) -- Peter Stephenson Tel: +39 050 844536 WWW: http://www.ifh.de/~pws/ Dipartimento di Fisica, Via Buonarroti 2, 56127 Pisa, Italy