Closed ozwaldorf closed 1 month ago
Hmm... Internals are the same for all the shells, the only difference is how completion info is collected from the shell and how results are rendered once they are known. Part responsible for collecting info from fish sits here:
It is supposed to run the original binary with --bpaf-complete-rev=9
, followed by all the arguments, followed by an empty argument if what we are trying to complete is a new word. Line 38 smells fishy. I guess it can use a bit of escaping?
Actually the fish stub is just wrong. Interestingly enough I made the change to make test to pass - and they pass just once per shell... Trying to fix.
Going back to revision 1 makes them look less fancy, but at least they work. Looking for a way to implement dynamic completions better. If all else fails - will go back and release a new version this later week.
On fish, the only completions present are for the subcommands, any other completions are blocked by the subcommand suggestions, even after putting a subcommand.
On zsh: