Re: Support for inverting of options?

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 17, 12:49am, Richard Hartmann wrote:
}
} Disadvantages of your solution over a native invoption are that you can
} not use the normal setopt and that you can not tab complete on
} invoption without writing a new completion.

Change the name of the function from ":set" to "setopt" and replace the
"setopt" in the "do" loop with "builtin setopt".

Or just do

    compdef :set=setopt

Either way, some matcher-list styles would deal with ignoring the "inv"
at the beginning of the option names, I think.