Re: completion match ordering

[dana <dana@xxxxxxx>]

On 25 Nov 2018, at 21:09, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>In general, I would default to assuming we should worry about
>compatibility, unless there's a specific reason not to.  (As a user,
>I assume that my zsh code is forward compatible with new zsh releases
>unless something is specifically documented to be an exception.)

Just in case you missed the background, Oliver found that -o was added
specifically to be used in _list_files, and i couldn't find anywhere else in the
main repo nor in the zsh-completions one that uses it. It is documented, though,
so i guess that's bothersome.

On 25 Nov 2018, at 21:09, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>No, what they *should* be doing is passing arguments transparently,
>without parsing and reserializing them, so when we add "-$letter"
>options to compadd we can do so by changing just one place (namely, the
>C struct declaring the builtin).  Probably by putting the compadd
>options in an array and passing its name, or by putting them in ${argv}
>after ${argv[(i)--]}, etc..

I like the idea of putting them in an array, that would alleviate some anxiety
i've had about this very issue. compadd has so many options, it becomes really
irritating to work around them in helper functions.

On 25 Nov 2018, at 19:25, Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>The patch below is an initial experiment for what I was suggesting.

I haven't really looked at this yet but i will soon. Thank you for working on
it!

dana