From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 3 23:04:07 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67FFC9F6 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2015 23:04:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECE212FD3 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2015 23:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ex7so1275133wid.9 for ; Sat, 03 Jan 2015 15:04:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=k9kN9klbpmqtiYiQkO06A2MKHgHqYKkrSmuPa5zTXaE=; b=IbqDC4HApsnLP72mgQAEcBN1dNzTyKmfsQr03vCN+86QUlzorY35wpM4GmivLwAlSH dlwDwZfPxOeizBxXFAIvQ20X98LlbiphVlrWCe5GaxlS349AO4LGRf4O3GnawBhVdDWo Sxq9sOzGzSTalExk6I5D8SPE9xwTGhHx5GYqqCMKrxVHQ+rWneS4FjExSN+y5SQPpJ4V 0VSeqBBaVlLb+dyCGbpN9o9Yil8GDi1bJqWyKYErGvutK4PHs0Qng8oUCHq//lXUJD+g za2G2ydoIlqOwznlfY03XOHeX382kkV7pB/8Uzrlb95W8emOPn1nUqKFWPYDVFZqwETC /K8w== X-Received: by 10.180.93.37 with SMTP id cr5mr10919732wib.76.1420326245274; Sat, 03 Jan 2015 15:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.63] (xdsl-89-0-141-24.netcologne.de. [89.0.141.24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n8sm69542136wjx.0.2015.01.03.15.04.04 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 03 Jan 2015 15:04:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54A8836D.1010805@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 01:03:57 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_Gr=c3=bcnewald?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:34.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/34.0 SeaMonkey/2.31 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Polytropon Subject: Re: TCSH completion patterns and the pkg command References: <54A85003.3000301@gmail.com> <20150103203734.5086dfd6.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20150103203734.5086dfd6.freebsd@edvax.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 23:04:07 -0000 Polytropon wrote: > The C shell is the system's _default_ interactive shell. > This statement does not carry any judgmental statement. :-) I was not sure any more about this, so I went lazy and blurry. :) > In my opinion, this is possible, but not easy. I'd say > it's easier to teach the C shell the completition rules > for the commands you want. I am not sure it easier to do so. If we consider the special example of git: * We have several possible sort of completion lists: remotes, branch names, tags, and commit hashs — the latter are commonly used for git commit --fixup et al. * We have a lot of subcommands having many options whose names sometimes collide and do not always use the same arguments (e.g. git diff -b and git checkout -b). It seems to me that it is very hard to propose pertinent completions for git if we do not take the current subcommand into account — but frankly, I did not try very hard. -- Michael