Re: PATCH 3/5: _imagemagick: complete all files if image files didn't match

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 13, 12:12pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
}
} Had I been paying enough attention in 2008 to be opinionated then, I
} would have questioned why we need a special style corresponding to a
} specific user preference that ought to be covered by file-patterns.

As I think I've mentioned elsewhere, file-patterns seems to take
precedence over list-dirst-first anyway.  So I suppose it could be
interpreted as a shorthand, except for the other-files business.

} _files does:
}   [[ "$type" = */* ]] && glob="$glob,*(-/)"
} 
} Either comma was at one time special to _path_files or this was never
} tested. In the patch below, I just remove it.

That bit is probably trying to do the trick of merging together glob
qualifiers, and just gets it wrong.  I.e. here:

    # add `^-/' after `#q' glob qualifier if not there already
    if [[ "$glob" = (#b)(*\(\#q)(*\)) ]]; then
      [[ $match[2] != \^-/* ]] &&
      glob="${match[1]}^-/,${match[2]}"
    else
      glob="$glob(#q^-/)"
    fi

} I would actually be inclined to suggest that other-files should be
} globbed-files: _files is defining three defaults for file-patterns
} corresponding to whether -g, -/ or neither was specified. So how do you
} override just one of those file patterns? If we define _files without a
} -g as being equivalent to _files -g '*(-.)' then a single file-patterns
} default would suffice. It'd also mean all-files would only be used as a
} fallback and globbed-files would be the tag for all the files when no
} glob is specified.

Does it ever make sense to use  _files -g '*(/)' ?  Or should -/ always
be used in that case?

} It would probably be a good
} thing if we can avoid every little completion function needing to do
} stuff like _files -g '*.png(-.)". -/ would mean we actually want to
} select directories. Any opinions?

I'm not sure I understand that part of the issue, yet.

-- 
Barton E. Schaefer