Peter van der Does <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 19:54:55 -0500 > Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Peter van der Does wrote: > > > > > The bash completion script could still be included with the core, > > > but we can offer different versions for different shells. > > > > Why? That's three times the maintenance work. > > The cons of everything in one script: > - If the script needs an update the submitter has to take in account > the different coding standards each shell has. Examples of this have > been given in the commit message of 06f44c3 (completion: make > compatible with zsh, 2010-09-06) > > - The script could end up with a slew of if statements to see which > shell the script is running in and taking some action. > > - Shells don't share all the same functions, the script could be filled > with functions not needed in other shells. the zsh patch includes > one, the Bash 4 patch includes several. > > The pros of everything in one script: > - Small changes, like adding an extra option to a git command for > completion only have to implemented in one script. What about having separate scripts, but sourcing common library that doesn't do completion, but just provides list of possible completions? This would be best of both worlds, I think. -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html