Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: PATCH: completing patterns (was: Re: PATCH: _rcs (was Re: still confused about completion and matching))
- X-seq: zsh-workers 13146
- From: "E. Jay Berkenbilt" <ejb@xxxxxx>
- To: wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: PATCH: completing patterns (was: Re: PATCH: _rcs (was Re: still confused about completion and matching))
- Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 13:48:36 -0500
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <200011080918.KAA20945@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (message from Sven Wischnowsky on Wed, 8 Nov 2000 10:18:28 +0100 (MET))
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <200011080918.KAA20945@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Ok, here is the patch how I'll commit it in a few moments. The two
> lines Jay complained about (and which I weren't that sure about, too)
> have been commented out (see 13074).
Okay.
> This patch does not include any changes to the handling of
> insert-unambiguous as discussed in 13076/13077. Maybe if we change
> the test in question so that menu completion is only started
> (regardless of insert-unambiguous) if the unambiguous string is empty?
> Or allow some more values for insert-unambiguous to express the
> different ways to handle insertion of unambiguous strings?
I don't have strong feelings about this. I don't completely
understand it either though.
> I would be thankful if Jay could confirm that I committed the right
> patch (there were so many of them ;-).
Consider it confirmed. I moved the patched files out of the way and
did a cvs update. The only thing that has changed is the addition of
the comment you included with the commenting out of those two lines...
Now we'll see what happens. :-)
Jay
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author