3 ms·
I referenced this article in a blog post last year. It's not very hard to tickle obvious bugs in bash's completion system. However even though they are things
by chubot 6y ago
I referenced this article in a blog post last year. It's not very hard to tickle obvious bugs in bash's completion system.
However even though they are things you would do pretty frequently like
echo $(basename <TAB>
echo `readlink <TAB>
I somehow wasn't aware of them. I suspect that's because I have been using bash for something like 15 years and was TRAINED not to type those things!
Oil Uses Its Parser For History And Completion
http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2020/01/history-and-completion.html http://www.oilshell.org/blog/2020/01/history-and-completion....
- aidenn0 6y agoThe first thing I do on a new system is add: shopt -u progcomp To the bashrc. I find the dumb "just complete a f@#$$# filename" completion to be at least predictable, even if it means i need to memorize a few more arguments to some programs. Just today, I created a test-user for something and hit <TAB> in bash expecting the dumb filename completion and instead it hung for about 90s then printed a python backtrace. So for me both of those work as expected if I'm on my bashrc...