On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 14:40 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 15:44 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-05-25 at 14:40 -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: > > > On 5/25/18 1:42 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > > > > > > There is already logic that determines whether the shell is > > > > > trying to > > > > > complete a command word (in_command_position). The existing > > > > > code > > > > > does > > > > > not attempt programmable completion if in_command_position == > > > > > 1. > > > > > The > > > > > additional functionality would: > > > > > > > > > > 1. Add an option to the complete builtin to specify how to > > > > > complete > > > > > command names, and store it in a specially-named compspec, > > > > > like > > > > > completion for empty lines does. > > > > > > > > > > 2. Add code to invoke that completion, if it exists and > > > > > programmable > > > > > completion is active, before attempting bash's default > > > > > completion, > > > > > if in_command_position == 1. > > > > > > > > > > Chet > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the guidance! Unfortunately I'm still not quite > > > > there > > > > yet - > > > > inlined are the changes based on my understanding of the above. > > > > It > > > > implements a "usercmd/-U" option similar to the existing -E for > > > > empty > > > > line. > > > > > > > > But at the moment all it does is to allow (via "complete -U -F > > > > foo") to > > > > complete when nothing is typed in, which seemed to be possible > > > > already > > > > with -E. If some characters are already typed in, it will still > > > > do > > > > the > > > > default completion to commands in the PATH. > > > > > > > > What have I missed? > > > > > > You should make sure you don't add your code in the section with > > > the > > > rest > > > of the programmable completions, since that block is not entered > > > if > > > in_command_position != 0. > > > > Thanks for the suggestion, it works perfectly now! > > > > Inlined is the latest revision, with added documentation. Let me > > know > > if you'd like me to change anything. > > Hello Chet, > > Just noticed other devs sent patches as attachments rather than > inline, > so just in case that's a more convenient form to review I'm including > the diff as an attachment. > > Thanks!
Hi Chet, Any chance you had a sec to look at the diff? Would love some feedback! Thanks! -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
