[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Man page section for complete's -C option is inconsistent

From: Mark Chandler
Subject: Re: Man page section for complete's -C option is inconsistent
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:37:43 +1000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0

Yep. It's definitely clear if you read the 'Programmable Completion' section.

A brief reference to the 'Programmable Completion' section to get that explanation would be useful. Or some hint that further reading is required to understand the functionality of this option.

As it stands the explanation of the -C option by itself is misleading. It doesn't mention the parameter passing at all. But it implies that all you need is a command that outputs possible completions. Particularly when you can see the following option -F explains how parameter passing is done, because that text is lacking for -C, it further implies that parameter passing is not done for -C. This is why I said that it's inconsistent.

If you like, I can try and go back through the source history to see if there's a comment around the commit for the -F text, to explain why it's more detailed there and not for -C. It is curious that they're so different.


Mark C.

On 07/07/2022 00:11, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 7/4/22 12:03 AM, Mark Chandler via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again
SHell wrote:
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g
-grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong
-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1  -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection
uname output: Linux ice-mef 5.18.7-200.fc36.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
Sat Jun 25 20:06:14 UTC 2022 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Machine Type: x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu

Bash Version: 5.1
Patch Level: 16
Release Status: release

         Even though the -C option of "complete" is functionally very
similar to -F, the man page
         only provides detailed usage for -F. The -C description doesn't
mention parameter passing.
Look at the `Programmable Completion' section:

"When the function or command is invoked, the
first argument ($1) is the name of the command whose arguments are  be-
ing  completed,  the  second argument ($2) is the word being completed,
and the third argument ($3) is the word preceding the word  being  com-
pleted on the current command line."

I can't recall why I duplicated that text in the description of `complete'.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]