Zsh Mailing List Archive Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: PATCH: _ls

X-seq: zsh-workers 22462
From: Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>
To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: PATCH: _ls
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 18:49:07 +0100
In-reply-to: <20060526174110.GF28414@xxxxxxxxx>
Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
References: <m33bf0vgd8.wl@xxxxxxxxx> <20060523171440.GE21617@xxxxxxxxx> <m31wukuq0c.wl@xxxxxxxxx> <20060525081040.GA569@xxxxxxxxx> <20060526174110.GF28414@xxxxxxxxx>

Wayne Davison wrote:
> This does bring up an interesting point about the exclusions that are
> currently in the completion system.  With a utility like ls, conflicting
> options are accepted, with the last one having precedence.  So, even
> though my alias specifies -C, I can still override that with -x.  So,
> should we avoid excluding options that may conflict ideologically as
> long as they don't conflict syntactically?

We could introduce a style, and get around the problem in the usual way.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>                  Software Engineer
CSR PLC, Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road
Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070


To access the latest news from CSR copy this link into a web browser:  http://www.csr.com/email_sig.php

References:
- PATCH: _ls
  - From: Hideki ONO
- Re: PATCH: _ls
  - From: Wayne Davison
- Re: PATCH: _ls
  - From: Hideki ONO
- Re: PATCH: _ls
  - From: Wayne Davison
- Re: PATCH: _ls
  - From: Wayne Davison

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author