From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9598: 24.0.50; completion goes too far Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:09:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: <5D4CCB828585430D8AB4FD61EAEAC5C0@us.oracle.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317017429 31633 80.91.229.12 (26 Sep 2011 06:10:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:10:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9598@debbugs.gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 26 08:10:25 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R84OX-0005dQ-0Y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:10:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50074 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R84OW-0000Un-El for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:38183) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R84OT-0000UW-EB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R84OS-0004Eg-B0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:21 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:56166) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R84OS-0004Ec-6y for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R84P7-0007l3-Ku for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:11:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:11:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9598 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9598-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9598.131701743429785 (code B ref 9598); Mon, 26 Sep 2011 06:11:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9598) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Sep 2011 06:10:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R84Of-0007kL-Id for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R84Oc-0007kC-OE for 9598@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:10:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R84Np-0006Gq-PK; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:09:41 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:00:28 -0400) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 02:11:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:51862 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:00:28 -0400 > From: Richard Stallman > Cc: 9598@debbugs.gnu.org > Reply-To: rms@gnu.org > > And we have been over this before[*]. People, including you, have pointed out > the user-oriented problems with this UI design, but Stefan really wants it this > way. So you and other users will continue to be surprised. > > I think we should poll the users about this question. That way we can > resolve the disagreement based on something more objective. I find arguments about defaults a waste of time. So I think instead of arguing and polling, we should just make sure there's a completion style that closely resembles what you want, i.e. candidates are found by matching their beginning with what the user typed. Currently, I find no such style in what minibuffer.el offers, or maybe there's a bug (see my other mail for bug #9591). (Btw, why do we have 2 separate bug reports about the same issue?) > IOW, let users choose at completion time which completion style(s) to use, on > demand. Each time they change methods they can complete anew and find out > whether there are matches using that method. > > This might be too complicated an interface to be good to use. I agree.