Re: Redirection completion

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Stephenson wrote:

> ...
> 
> Sorry, I didn't make my question clear.  I understand how it looks for
> what to execute to find completions (though I wouldn't have guessed
> about `-redirect--default-' without looking at the code, although that's
> logical).  My question was, when I get where I'm going and try
> completion, what context is seen by styles?  What I'm worring about is
> if I'm in some generic form of redirection completion I can still check
> for `-redirect-echo-2>' in pattern-files, or does the context still just look
> like `-redirect-2>' or `-redirect--default-'?

Ah, I see.  Currently it is as you fear, it just uses the string for
which it found a completion function.  That's obviously silly and I'll
change that this evening.

But I'm not really sure which string to prefer in each case.  I'd
prefer the most specific one, i.e. `-redirect-echo-2>' in this case.
Would that be ok for our users if we document it?


Bye
  Sven

-- 
Sven Wischnowsky                          wischnow@xxxxxxxxx