Re: [PATCH] Re: Other details about completion.

[Ergus <spacibba@aol.com>]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 07:53:33PM +0300, Juri Linkov wrote:
>>> icomplete is based on post-command-hook, so zcomplete would need it too.
>>
>> Sorry, not agree here. If zcomplete intention is to emulate the zsh
>> behavior then it is not needed to use post-command-hook. Completions are
>> shown on demand <tab>... post-command-hook is for a behavior more like
>> browsers... We already have helm, ivy, icomplete, vertico, selectrum,
>> ido, fido (with the vertical variants too) and all the others... I don't
>> think we need more of that and reinvent the well once again.
>>
>> Simple in better than complicated ;)
>
>Earlier you suggested to add a new minor mode, but now you say
>that a minor mode is complicated.  Isn't this a contradiction? ;)
>
You said it was and I didn't want to argue on that... Remember lisp is a
sort of magician... so I always assume there are quick solutions but I
tend to reinvent the well myself. For example... That menu-item+filter
solution you proposed for me is black magic and I couldn't even find
what a menu-item.

>And the same find-as-you-type autocompletion like in browsers
>is supported by zsh as well:
>https://github.com/marlonrichert/zsh-autocomplete
>
Yes, I know it. I tried it when I had zsh some time ago... But 1) it is
an external thing not in zsh 2) it will be simpler to implement with
icomplete and that family of completion engines.

Also the zle engine is much more robust and simple than what we have in
emacs now because it only needs to support their use case; and written
from the scratch for them.

In emacs there is already vertico to do more or less what you want and
it ended up being a bit more complex that what we want in vanilla but
with more or less 800 lines... If we want vertico, then just add vertico
to vanilla, lets not re-implement it right?