Re: [PATCH] _git: Add completion for help subcommand

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 30,  8:59pm, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
} Subject: Re: [PATCH] _git: Add completion for help subcommand
}
} > On Aug 26,  9:55am, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
} 
} > } (    --b --c)--a
} > } (--a     --c)--b
} > } (--a --b    )--c
} 
} What I never "understood" was why the standard form wasn't to use a
} variable in this case. I mean, the difference is that you exclude the
} current option, which is of course excluded by itself (unless its
} defined as being able to appear many times).

Hmm.  I'm not certain, now that you mention it.  The functions that
use the above form are generally some of the earliest completions
that were ever written (or were cribbed from those early ones), so it
may be that at one point in the past it was a problem to exclude the
same option one was defining, e.g., (--a)--a would break.  If that's
not currently the case [I don't know either way] then you're right,
one might as well use the style with the variable.

--