From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9341 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2002 08:53:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9312 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2002 08:53:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freya.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.14) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jan 2002 08:53:48 -0000 Received: from zaretsky ([192.116.55.139]) by freya.inter.net.il (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id BDL56020; Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:53:35 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 00:53:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: msnyder@cygnus.com Message-Id: <4949-Sat05Jan2002105028+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: emacs 21.1.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <200201050247.g052lHU16418@reddwarf.cygnus.com> (message from Michael Snyder on Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:47:17 -0800) Subject: Re: [RFA] "Help" command and completion Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200201050247.g052lHU16418@reddwarf.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:47:17 -0800 > From: Michael Snyder > > Hmmm... currently the help command uses the default completer, > which completes on symbols. That's definitely not right. > Ideally, we want to complete on commands or something, but > substituting the noop complete would definitely be better than > completing on symbols. How is no completion better than completion on symbols?