From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [friedman@splode.com: some other observations on pcomplete] Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:12:02 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200203121812.g2CIC2E15076@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200203102132.g2ALWfr04155@wijiji.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1015956924 29878 80.91.224.249 (12 Mar 2002 18:15:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 18:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, johnw@gnu.org, friedman@splode.com Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16kqo0-0007ln-00 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:15:24 +0100 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16kqqH-0006BT-00 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:17:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16kqnm-0000oa-00; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:15:10 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16kqkl-0000d7-00; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:12:03 -0500 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g2CIC2E15076; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:12:02 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:1883 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1883 > I think someone is fixing the first of these problems, > but the rest seem severe enough that I think we should > revert the change and put Shell mode completion back the > way it was. > > Could someone please make that change? The three other points are all due to the choice of default behavior (half-cycling). Changing that default is trivial. The use of pcomplete.el has several advantages, even if you make it behave "almost as the old code", so I think it would be an error to revert the change. But I agree that the default should be changed to match the previous non-cycling behavior (which is also the behavior used throughout Emacs). Stefan _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel