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 21:19:34 +0300 Message-ID: <83y2do3cqx.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> <837dl93ppw.fsf@gnu.org> <8b54a223-1359-a8da-61c2-d7947b1c201a@yandex.ru> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13625"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: philipk@posteo.net, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 11 20:21:51 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 1lVeiV-0003TB-RF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 20:21:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51730 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVeiU-0002n3-QY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:21:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48024) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVegg-0002EJ-0t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:19:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37841) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVegf-00008h-Es; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:19:57 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4743 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lVegd-0003NB-9k; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:19:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <8b54a223-1359-a8da-61c2-d7947b1c201a@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sun, 11 Apr 2021 20:16:29 +0300) 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:267908 Archived-At: > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 20:16:29 +0300 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > > I agree we should be able to keep both kinds of completion and let the > users choose they generally prefer, that's why I made emphasis on which > usages really *can't* employ the wrong kind of completion (and thus > would generally follow the programmer's hint and not the user > customization). I'm not sure there could be use cases where it is clear up front which UI is "right" and which is "wrong". In every situation I thought about there could be a place for both, depending on what the user wants to do and how. > I do think it's unfortunate you're adamant about using only one of these > approaches, because we're missing out on valuable feedback and > recommendations this way (and maybe some strategic support) You make it sound like I could easily use the other approach, but just won't because I'm stubborn or worse. Nothing is farther from the truth. I cannot change my workflows, they are burnt into my muscle memory. I can only try "the other approach" briefly, and that is unlikely to give you any useful feedback.