Re: Man page section for complete's -C option is inconsistent

[Chet Ramey]

On 7/4/22 12:03 AM, Mark Chandler via Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again
SHell wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: x86_64
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS: -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g
> -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security
> -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
> -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong
> -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1  -m64 -mtune=generic
> -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection
> uname output: Linux ice-mef 5.18.7-200.fc36.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> Sat Jun 25 20:06:14 UTC 2022 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> Machine Type: x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
> 
> Bash Version: 5.1
> Patch Level: 16
> Release Status: release
> 
> Description:
>         Even though the -C option of "complete" is functionally very
> similar to -F, the man page
>         only provides detailed usage for -F. The -C description doesn't
> mention parameter passing.

Look at the `Programmable Completion' section:

"When the function or command is invoked, the
first argument ($1) is the name of the command whose arguments are  be-
ing  completed,  the  second argument ($2) is the word being completed,
and the third argument ($3) is the word preceding the word  being  com-
pleted on the current command line."

I can't recall why I duplicated that text in the description of `complete'.


-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/