Re: PATCH: suffix aliases

[Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:
> > I stuck with suffixes instead of patterns, which would have been less
> > efficient and more complicated for little extra gain.
> 
> That's a pity.

Patterns would need to be array-based rather than hash-based.  That way
you don't get a hit if you don't have any pattern aliases.  It's not
at all technically difficult to add.  I think we need suffix aliases for
efficiency anyway.

> > I dutifully added completion to _alias, but it seems that doesn't
> > understand the difference between aliases with different options, so I
> 
> There isn't much point: completing existing aliases when defining new
> ones isn't that useful anyway.

It would be useful when trying to output existing messages.  I'm a bit
bemused why _aliases goes to all that trouble of sorting aliases into
type but _alias doesn't use it.

pws


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.  
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************