Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: PATCH: _diff (new), _prcs (upgrade)
- X-seq: zsh-workers 9484
- From: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: PATCH: _diff (new), _prcs (upgrade)
- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:09:53 +0100 (MET)
- In-reply-to: Alexandre Duret-Lutz's message of 28 Jan 2000 17:24:14 +0100
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> ...
>
> Sven> I suggested that to enable completion functions to make it as you
> Sven> described in 9453: if we are completing for the command, call it
> Sven> without a `command', otherwise with it. And that can't be decided in
> Sven> _call.
>
> I must be missing something. Can't $curcontext be used?
> I am thinking about something like this:
>
> #
> _call () {
> if [[ $curcontext == *:$1: ]]
> then
> $1 #(A)
> else
> command $1 #(B)
> fi
> }
>
> _f() {
> _call foo
> }
>
> compdef _f foo bar
>
>
> seems to run either (A) or (B) wheter I complete after foo or bar.
Hm, for forcing the test to use only command names, this would be
`::${1}:'. Maybe. I'm trying to think of a case where this would fail,
but I can't find one just now...
Bye
Sven
--
Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author