Best way to add custom completions in examples for Commander

[shadowspawn]

Some of the frameworks have added an extra config parameter to the setup call to pass in custom completions:

tab/examples/demo.citty.ts

Line 131 in 532721c

const completion = await tab(main, {

The README uses a programmatic approach:

https://github.com/bombshell-dev/tab/blob/532721ccc32f3ba27178fe13e651133a40394d48/README.md?plain=1#L252-259

The Commander example does not currently have functional custom completions. Which style would you prefer to use? Commander uses lots of chaining and hierarchy and little JSON, so the style used in the README is comfortable. But consistency across examples and frameworks may well be preferred.

[AmirSa12]

Some of the frameworks have added an extra config parameter to the setup call to pass in custom completions:

tab/examples/demo.citty.ts

Line 131 in 532721c

const completion = await tab(main, {
The README uses a programmatic approach:

https://github.com/bombshell-dev/tab/blob/532721ccc32f3ba27178fe13e651133a40394d48/README.md?plain=1#L252-259

The Commander example does not currently have functional custom completions. Which style would you prefer to use? Commander uses lots of chaining and hierarchy and little JSON, so the style used in the README is comfortable. But consistency across examples and frameworks may well be preferred.

Hey @shadowspawn first of all, thanks a lot for the thoughtful message and for your contributions

I agree consistency matters, but I'd rather leave the choice to users than force one style. The programmatic style already works across all adapters... The completionConfig second argument is just a declarative shortcut that fits config-heavy frameworks

What do you think about adding that second argument to Commander as well, and documenting both styles in the README?

[shadowspawn]

Thanks. In first instance, I'm keen to get most of the tests running on Commander. So I'll go the programmatic route initially, even if gets replaced when add completionConfig.

What do you think about adding that second argument to Commander as well, and documenting both styles in the README?

Short version: 👍

Long version: it is extra work (for Commander framework) and two approaches to maintain. But already have both for some frameworks. I also like users having choice to match personal preference or CLI engine style.