From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#47711: bug#48841: bug#47711: bug#48841: bug#47711: [PATCH VERSION 2] Add new `completion-filter-completions` API and deferred highlighting Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:05:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: <56ab18b1-4348-9b2c-85bb-af9b76cd429a@daniel-mendler.de> <328f87eb-6474-1442-e1ca-9ae8deb2a84a@yandex.ru> <83fsvcbio7.fsf@gnu.org> <9f432d18-e70f-54c1-0173-1899fb66d176@gutov.dev> <877cnafv39.fsf@gmail.com> <9447dde3-b8e7-2ec0-9a9c-72c4cf9d12a8@gutov.dev> <7d14bc13-4419-816c-5708-c42988c39c02@gutov.dev> <5d0a78cc-4fa0-ef04-3462-1826f17d7d56@gutov.dev> <1504b2e4-42d9-5d7b-eaa2-c7b7d5ca02ba@gutov.dev> <40ddec76-751a-36cd-7f45-34de2d9d9393@gutov.dev> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32033"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Daniel Mendler , Eli Zaretskii , =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= , 47711@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 03 04:06:52 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qykWJ-000883-Dy for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 04:06:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qykW1-0004qm-4q; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:06:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qykVv-0004qU-Te for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:06:28 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qykVv-0008MK-Hj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:06:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qykWU-00038y-C0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:07:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 03:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47711 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 47711-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47711.169898076512010 (code B ref 47711); Fri, 03 Nov 2023 03:07:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 47711) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Nov 2023 03:06:05 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56551 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qykVV-00037N-RR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:06:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:13472) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qykVP-000372-Vq for 47711@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 23:05:59 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 315BE8076B; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 23:05:15 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1698980714; bh=D3uGUKlYCW/VHrXcZjqCB6TEBlAQ+6x0BuY57plVaDE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=lhCuHX8geg23flbyD2uGj+GzpcPfWY+1cD17fHoPJdb5TLzHshXb4XQ7oDTmDrlIP /MarxTeIOE5gFiMP0EcE0VZK0mG0ELUDz+5+KNuW64KdOWTzJ3I4O/vVhOTtE+gZIH SJeL14fUdH9Dnoir1oG6CNfshjJOEtGOifUnDQNkRGXGROCFMOReQc4x+/rzkwt4Ou qxzW7PurrmTqCLNmr0ao3xvURUfumwS8lT6g9UtnGcG7sWh3EiKLc1ZNwlpzplqslh VNmbBe6KbwpDOHgfGfW5ruHERa9bXDragatw6dWo4dxOMbz26xf8JV3sNctXPwDRK/ 3lmzGA/jbGfGA== Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 31E6A80087; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 23:05:14 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.195.71]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1C67120420; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 23:05:13 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Fri, 3 Nov 2023 02:16:23 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:273689 Archived-At: > Sorry for the pause, let's continue this digression. Though perhaps it would > be better moved to emacs-devel or somewhere else. ;-/ I see this API as an experiment. I have no idea if I'll like the result. It's definitely far from being something ready to submit as a proposal for a new design. >>> As such, the most useful methods currently are: 1) Emacs Regexp, 2) asking >>> server for whatever it thinks is suitable (the "backend" completion style). >> For the backends: agreed. >> For the frontends (i.e. `completion-styles`), `glob` is the more useful >> one, I'd say (except for the "external" style, of course). >> We might also want support for things like `or` and `and` patterns, but >> I haven't managed to fit them nicely in that structure :-( > Possibly, but which code would produce such patterns? The `or` pattern? No idea :-) The `and` pattern? Well, the `orderless` style, for one. But indeed, I'm not sure it'd be useful to handle things like or/and directly in there rather than by using union/intersection on the resulting completions. It's just an aspect of the design I considered and I noticed that I had trouble extending it in that direction. Obviously, the caller which needs to collect a set of matching candidates always has a choice between using a more refined pattern or using a simpler pattern (including various calls with various different patterns). >>> I would also probably want to standardize on the recommended type of TO >>> anyway: some of them are likely going to result in better performance >>> than others. >> The TO is chosen by the specific completion table, based on what it can >> handle best. So it should always be "optimal". > Sorry, I meant the recommended type of FROM. Because if the original caller > passes an arbitrary regexp, it will often get turned into a pair with > a predicate where the latter calls string-match-p. The caller should use the most primitive pattern they can. > And if the type of FROM is standardized, there likely would be no need for > a four-way bidirectional conversion. Maybe just a helper that converts from > the original "main" type into any of the available that is > currently required. Indeed the default method does: (cond ((eq to (car pattern)) (cons nil (cdr pattern))) ((eq 'glob to) (cl-call-next-method)) (t ;; Most conversions can be performed by going through `glob'. (pcase-let* ((`(,gpred . ,glob) (completion-pattern-convert 'glob pattern)) (`(,tpred . ,newpattern) (completion-pattern-convert to glob))) (cons (or gpred tpred) newpattern))))) >>> So I guess it's also a way to make every completion table aware of PRED? >> Note also that these `pred` patterns are expected to be exclusively >> looking at the string (they're used for `completion-styles` kind of >> functionality), so nothing like `file-directory-p` or `fboundp` kind of >> predicates here. > Would we consider those pred's "fast enough"? I don't know. I haven't had a use for a `pred` pattern yet, to be honest. As for the predicates returned by `completion-pattern-convert`, they're currently just fancy booleans indicating if the returned pattern is faithful or not :-) So I'm not sure those predicates will survive this experiment. > (benchmark-run 10 (let* ((re "yo[^o]*o") > (completion-regexp-list (list re))) > (all-completions "" sss))) > ;; => 0.60s > > > (benchmark-run 10 (let* ((re "yo[^o]*o")) > (all-completions "" sss > (lambda (s) (string-match-p re s))))) > ;; => 1.14s >>> That should work; though it might be hard to reach the same raw performance >>> as the current all-completions + completion-regexp-list. >> I don't see why: currently my code actually uses `all-completions` and >> `completion-regexp-list`, so as long as the pattern can be turned into >> a regexp without requiring an additional PRED (that's usually the case), <...> > Right, I was talking about the possible exceptions. I don't know what you're getting at. Stefan