3 ms·

I'm baffled with the effort people put for writing _g_ and not writing _it_. Now I'm incredibly fond of path completion, but I guess it shouldn't be the shell

by gkya 11y ago

I'm baffled with the effort people put for writing _g_ and not writing _it_. Now I'm incredibly fond of path completion, but I guess it shouldn't be the shell to do that, but the terminal, because the function is generic, i.e. whathever shell one uses, it is beneficial. Emacs/Comint does that, and it's comfortable and predictable.

0942v8653 11y ago
> I guess it shouldn't be the shell to do that, but the terminal How would this work over SSH? What if you're using a temporary shell as another user? Also, the terminal really shouldn't have to know what is going on in the shell in order to work reliably. Tools like tmux, screen… should not have to perform directory completion.
- gkya 11y ago
  There can be a single pathcompd service that does ipc too. Or maybe that can be left to readline, etc. I don't see why a command interpreter should do line editing/path completion in and of itself.