Re: simulation of dabbrev-expand

[Zefram <zefram@fysh.org>]

Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
>Ok. This makes `-1' keep the completion system from removing all
>duplicates and `-2' keep it from removing consecutive duplicates. Yes, 
>the sense is reversed so that `-J' still gives the normal behaviour.

So you mean

	neither option = remove all duplicates
	-1 = keep non-consecutive duplicates and remove consecutive duplicates
	-2 = keep all duplicates

>In other words:
>-V   -- unsorted list without duplicates
>-V1  -- unsorted list with only non-consecutive duplicates
>-V2  -- unsorted list with all duplicates

OK

>-J   -- sorted list without duplicates
>-J1  -- sorted list with duplicates (which are all consecutive due to
>        the sorting)
>-J2  -- same as -J1

That can't be right.  -J1 should be removing consecutive duplicates,
i.e., all duplicates due to the sorting.  Shouldn't it?

>+item(tt(-2))(
>+If given together with the tt(-J) option, behaves the same as
>+tt(-J).

This looks fishy too.

-zefram