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: [External] : Re: command mode-specificity [was: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change...] Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 17:47:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83mtw27l21.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wnv7spji.fsf@gnus.org> <875z2rslqk.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1lfr647.fsf@gnus.org> <87pn0zfs4u.fsf@telefonica.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5430"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 17 16:48:42 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 1lCP4D-0001J6-7x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:48:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38830 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCP4C-00022l-8T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:48:40 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48672) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCP3H-00017v-D9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:47:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48858) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCP3G-0001o9-JZ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:47:42 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4462 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lCP3F-0007NA-Tf; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 10:47:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87pn0zfs4u.fsf@telefonica.net> (message from =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes on Wed, 17 Feb 2021 01:35:29 +0100) 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:265009 Archived-At: > From: Óscar Fuentes > Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 01:35:29 +0100 > > I explained many times, now and on the previous discussion about this > feature long time ago, why it would be so helpful to me that I will be > happy to devote many hours to tag as many commands as possible. No one is arguing that having this filtering as an optional behavior can be useful. The argument, at least from my side, was that I don't think it can, in its current too radical shape, be the default, because it is both backward-incompatible and provides no "fire escape". If the implementation were to change, such that it didn't actually remove commands from the list of completion candidate, then perhaps we could make this the default (but even then I'm not sure). > Then you handwave away common-sense arguments as irrelevant or > conflicting with some sort of imagined scenario, or because it goes > against some personal habits of abusing a feature (M-x for remembering > commands instead of C-h a? Seriously? Please cool down. One person's must-have feature is another person's "imagined scenario" or "personal habits of abusing". User options exist in Emacs because we try not to be too judgmental, and let each one have their preferences.