From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stepping Back: A Wealth Of Completion systems Re: [ELPA] New package: vertico Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:39:23 +0300 Message-ID: <837dl93ppw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9c9af088-580f-9fb1-4d79-237a74ce605c@inventati.org> <874kgkxxs0.fsf@posteo.net> <78741fe6-2612-d7c9-2bc4-0b68ea7fa51a@yandex.ru> <76a4d0e2-117b-165d-d56e-5bc2f504b50c@yandex.ru> <87blapln0r.fsf@posteo.net> <37bd2e96-ce04-eb6d-24da-fdd7ea427e61@yandex.ru> <87im4wx2ct.fsf@posteo.net> <83ft0080hi.fsf@gnu.org> <16784f40-b959-9a84-65d4-93b71d1bebec@yandex.ru> <837dla7ghj.fsf@gnu.org> <83lf9q5r7k.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnt957rc.fsf@posteo.net> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16952"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 11 15:40:38 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1lVaKM-0004Iv-OQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 15:40:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56086 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVaKL-00022L-R6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:40:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37118) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVaJe-0001bi-TI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:39:54 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:33866) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVaJe-0003Fa-Lu; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:39:54 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2407 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lVaJQ-0002mW-Py; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 09:39:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87wnt957rc.fsf@posteo.net> (message from Philip Kaludercic on Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:24:23 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:267876 Archived-At: > From: Philip Kaludercic > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, > emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru > Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:24:23 +0200 > > > I don't think the distinction matters here. We are discussing if > > candidates should be shown eagerly, and my answer is "yes". > > Are you using an alternative completion framework? I find it interesting > how some people agree with the distinction and others don't, and wonder > if the way they use Emacs shapes their opinion. My theory is that some people prefer the selection-type of completion, and others (like me) don't. I don't see a reason to try to settle the difference, it's a matter of personal preferences and past experience.