Comment 8 for bug 783900

Maybe. I don't know anything about coding, but I think there are a lot of ways to do this.

Maybe it could be one unequivocal killer-unique string to be attached in front of the ?. This could be done manually by the user or by CLIC after the user has marked the wildcards explicitely.

 /? seems a little too short to me, because again I cannot imagine all cases of reallife Bashcode containing this string!! Python could search for '739287679328734647700112197?'. When using the library from outside of CLIC you would just have to remove this unequivocal string. python should exclude these very wildcards and replace them by '?' in an additional condition right in the replace algorithm, - but not further handle them so that they might enter Bash.

 Another way would to remember the wildcard by the number of it's finding. Python is counting them already. Let the user mark them when the command is saved, count them and save their numbers into some file or even into the .clicompanion2

The question is how much CLI Companion might be extended into a wider operating agent, e. g. if call-by-argument might be implemented, so that recursively interlacing CLIC agents would work concurrently or successively. Not until then the question of runtime of some of the replace algorithms might become crucial. At the present state it's no matter of runtime or clever coding. but ... respice finem ....

Sorry If I am writing nonsense but I don't know much about computers.