I must confess (blissful) ignorance of the implications of standards like POSIX, although I am aware that they exist :-).
However, when you state that my proposed tabtabcomp would be "another rarely used option which does not improve the life of the normal users" I guess that means that vi-mode users are not normal -- you are in favor of making the tab-tab completion feature the sole province of emacs-mode users. Then again, you may be completely correct in implying that vi-mode users never use tab-tab in this manner. I can't speak for others, by this vi-mode user never uses tab completion at all -- it was invented long after I developed other difficult-to-break typing habits! ;-). Cheers, Mario Martin Schaffstall wrote: > On 6/19/06, Mario DeFazio <Mario.DeFazio at morganstanley.com> wrote: > >> I was thinking that this new 'tabtabcomp' option would be an explicit >> flag >> to set this one feature, regardless of the editing mode (vi or >> gmacs/emacs). >> Of course for convenience (aka outreach to the bash user community :-)) >> '-o gmacs' could assume '-o tabtabcomp' unless '+o tabtabcomp' was set. > > > I don't like that idea because to conform POSIX this switch needs to > be off by default. And then we have another rarely used option which > does not improve the life of the normal users unless someone reads the > manual page completely. > I think it is better to tie this function either into both emacs and > gmacs mode as we now have ^V as general escape mode or add this to the > gmacs mode exclusively. Adding more options is really not what we > want, at least in my opinion.
