Re: How about separating "_arguments --" into a new function?

[Jun T <takimoto-j@kba.biglobe.ne.jp>]

> 2021/10/18 1:49, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> 
>>>> Or just using $_args_cache_cmd is enough?
>>> 
>>> If it is enough, then it should be made more discoverable.
>> 
>> I guess it is enough since no one is requesting to separate _arguments.
>> How about the following?
>> 
> 
> Are we happy with documenting it as a first-class feature, i.e., one
> that we would be expected to continue supporting?  Or would we rather
> document this as a "we may change this in the future" thing?

I personally feel we don't need to document it (it's a kind of hidden
feature). But you said it should be more discoverable. So where should
it be documented? At the end ofEtc/completion-style-guide? Or as a
comment at the top of _arguments?


> Typos: "commnd", "chache".


Thanks.

> Would prefer «print -r --» in case of backslashes,

I think (qqq) takes care of backslashes etc., but will use print -r
if it looks safer.