Re: [PATCH] tcsh-completion re-using git-completion.bash

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Is it possible to just check if this is a login shell?
>>>
>>> I think it would be nice to allow the user to manually
>>> source git-completion.tcsh, in case they want to make
>>> manual modifications to it.
>>
>> Yeah, they could still do that... because they would be running in a
>> login shell.
>>
>> What I meant is that if the user does: tcsh
>> my_script_that_has_nothing_to_do_with_completion.sh, they would not be
>> executing this whole script.
>
> Oh, I see now.
>
> I can put a check in the script for the existence of the $prompt variable.
> This will indicate if it is a login shell or not.
> However, a good .cshrc file should already have such a check to avoid
> sourcing a bunch of useless things.  So, I personally think that we
> should not add it to the git-completion.tcsh script but let the tcsh
> user decide to do it herself.  But I don't mind being overruled :)

Sounds sensible to me.

>>> I think the most user-friendly option is to actually re-generate the
>>> script each time.  It feels wrong, but it works well :)
>>
>> I'm not too strongly opposed to add that function to the bash
>> completion, but to do it only for tcsh doesn't sound right, specially
>> when there are other alternatives.
>
> I agree, and this is why I made the proposed
> __git_complete_with_output () generic.  That way it could be
> used by other shells or programs.  But at this time, only tcsh
> would make use of it.
>
> If you think having __git_complete_with_output () could
> be useful for others, I think we should go with solution (A).
> If you don't think so, or if it is better to wait until a need
> arises first, then solution (C) will work fine.

I don't see how it could be useful to others, and if we find out that
it could, we can always move the code.

>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but very few people use tcsh.
>
> Less than I originally thought, when I started working
> on this patch :-\  But I'm still hoping that the those people
> will be a little happier with their git completion.

I think they would :) But we don't need to modify bash's script for
that (for now).

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras