From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 351 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 18:30:42 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Apr 2000 18:30:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 23568 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2000 18:30:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10521 Received: (qmail 23552 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 18:30:01 -0000 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: Completion issues In-reply-to: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Mon, 03 Apr 2000 17:25:52 +0200." <200004031525.RAA32538@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 19:30:00 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson Message-Id: Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > Hm. Should we add a tag-labels style again (tested for every tag in > tag-order, gives labels to use for this tag in its value)? My main > reason for not liking this that much is the fact that it's in C now -- > I wanted to avoid having style-lookups hidden in some C-function. As long as it works, which it does now, I'm not worried. > > I would expect the following to work: > > zstyle ':completion:*:sequences' tag-order sequences:-name sequences:-num > > zstlye ':completion:*:sequences-name' ignored-patterns '<->' > > zstyle ':completion:*:sequences-num' ignored-patterns '^<->' This now works, too > > Another thing: I couldn't get matcher-list to work for a labelled > > completer, e.g. _complete:-extended. This seems to work this time. Don't what I did wrong. So what's the difference between matcher and matcher-list now? The latter is looked up once for a completer (but again if we have a labelled completer), but the latter is looked up every single time we add a match? -- Peter Stephenson Work: pws@CambridgeSiliconRadio.com Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk