Re: completion, sorting of options

[Thomas Lauer <thomas.lauer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2023 10:07:16 -0800

> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 5:32?AM Thomas Lauer <thomas.lauer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > It's just a bit frustrating that what I'd call an
> > implementation detail within _arguments makes this call perform in a way
> > a (probably naive) user doesn't expect and can't easily grok or rectify.
> 
> Combination of an unanticipated use case and the order in which
> features like unsorted groups were added to "compadd" relative to the
> implementation of _arguments.

Weeeellllll, unanticipated use case... that's debatable IMO. Obviously
somebody thought that a no-sort option would be a good idea, in fact
such a good idea that there are two ways to do it. But what they then
proceeded to do was to have the nosort option sort just a tiny little
bit anyway, for good measure. In my book that's not an unanticipated use
case but questionable design.

I am an old-fashioned git and think that an option should do what it
says on the tin. I'd readily accept that "sort false" does the tiny
little bit anyway, but then nosort should definitely switch sorting off
completely (or vice versa).

Anyway, horse dead, flogging ends here.  T