From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Updating *Completions* as you type
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 20:31:21 +0200
Organization: LINKOV.NET
Message-ID: <86o7fhy9ae.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
References: <87bkd3z9bi.fsf@catern.com> <87sf68unh1.fsf@catern.com>
 <86zg0fu99i.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <875y33v73h.fsf@catern.com>
 <87y1fztke8.fsf@catern.com> <86r0lrw17x.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <87il5xlf9b.fsf@catern.com> <86y1esuajx.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <ierleas4fcr.fsf@janestreet.com> <86v89ws5t3.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <iercyw445tu.fsf@janestreet.com> <86v89vzf1o.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <87pm03jn3w.fsf@catern.com> <861qcjw3ch.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <ier1qcin8db.fsf@janestreet.com> <86r0ki2on3.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <ierttpdlqe4.fsf@janestreet.com> <86leao519y.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <87fs0wk5oq.fsf@catern.com> <86edgfin4v.fsf@mail.linkov.net>
 <87o7fhixzv.fsf@catern.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="11034"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/30.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Cc: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@catern.com>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 25 19:44:01 2023
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1r6xdI-0002ej-PA
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:44:00 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces@gnu.org>)
	id 1r6xcb-0003Xr-NX; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 13:43:17 -0500
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <juri@linkov.net>) id 1r6xcU-0003Vz-OK
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 13:43:11 -0500
Original-Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.198])
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <juri@linkov.net>) id 1r6xcS-0000WM-F5
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 13:43:10 -0500
Original-Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC69AC0004;
 Sat, 25 Nov 2023 18:43:03 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <87o7fhixzv.fsf@catern.com> (Spencer Baugh's message of "Sat, 25
 Nov 2023 16:44:50 +0000 (UTC)")
X-GND-Sasl: juri@linkov.net
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.183.198; envelope-from=juri@linkov.net;
 helo=relay6-d.mail.gandi.net
X-Spam_score_int: -25
X-Spam_score: -2.6
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
 SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:313219
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/313219>

>>>> I don't think this is realistic to add an individual option in all cases.
>>>
>>> That's not necessary.  We could also do possibility C that I described
>>> before:
>>>
>>>>> C.
>>>>> - Remove display-sort-function from the metadata
>>>>> - add the 'read-kill category to the metadata
>>>>> - add 'read-kill to completion-category-defaults
>>>>> (diff is 3 lines)
>>>
>>> That seems simple and straightforward.
>>
>> Removing display-sort-function is still less safe
>> than just adding a category.
>
> Why do you say that?
>
> The reason that comes to mind is that there are replacement completion
> UIs which will need to explicitly add support for the category.  So
> removing display-sort-function will affect them immediately, when they
> might not yet have support for getting display-sort-function from
> completion-category-defaults.
>
> That is true.
>
> But that actually suggests a further argument in this direction: if we
> use user options which change the display-sort-function in the table
> metadata, we'll have support for all completion UIs out of the box.
>
> That seems really desirable!  So maybe we do want a solution like A
> where we add a user option?  Since that user option will work for all
> completion UIs.
>
> Announcing "you can now customize the sorting order of a bunch of
> completing-read-based things in this new way" but having that new way
> only work for the default completion UI is a bit sad, although of course
> they can support the new way eventually.

This is what I believe they should do: we add a category,
and they support it as well.

>>> Identity obviously keeps the original order, but what is the original
>>> order?  That is not documented anywhere and I don't think it's
>>> intuitive.  The user can always just try it and see, but that's a poor
>>> substitute for documentation.
>>
>> In these rare cases when the default order is not intuitive,
>> this can be explained in the docstring of the command that uses
>> 'completing-read', e.g. in the docstring of 'read-from-kill-ring'.
>
> Hm, I do think the wording on that would be a bit tricky.  Since
> *actually* the default behavior today is alphabetical sorting.  We would
> want to say "if completions-sort is nil, read-buffer completions are in
> buffer-list order".
>
> I guess it's not too bad, but we also need to document the category
> symbol.  And perhaps the version it was added in.  All together it still
> seems to me that it would be better to just mention
> 'read-from-kill-ring-sort' in the docstring of 'read-from-kill-ring'.

I'm still not convinced that a user option is needed for such minor thing.

>>>> I still don't understand why do you worry about this precedence when
>>>> the user option completion-category-overrides is nil by default.
>>>>
>>>> Could you describe a use cases when such precedence might become a problem?
>>>
>>> If some table needs an individual option (because the sorting needs to
>>> affect the completion generation), but the table shares a category with
>>> other tables, then that individual option will be overridden by the
>>> category configuration.
>>
>> Agreed, this is a problem.
>>
>>> For example, project-prompt-project-name allows one to complete over
>>> project names.  If I wanted to sort its completions by some detail of
>>> the underlying project (how recently the git repo was updated, maybe),
>>> that would require the table to change behavior.  So it would need an
>>> individual option.
>>
>> Or an individual subcategory.
>>
>>> However, project-prompt-project-name uses the same category as
>>> project-find-file.  So if the user configured sorting for
>>> project-find-file, it will override the table-specific option for
>>> project-prompt-project-name.
>>
>> I believe they should use two different subcategories, e.g.
>> 'project-file' and 'project-name'.
>
> I agree, but...
>
>>> I suppose another option is to simply declare that every table has to
>>> have a unique category.  That would make "category" a misnomer though.
>>
>> Even such subcategories as 'project-name' make sense to use in other
>> possible cases when reading a project name.
>
> ...if the project-name category is used for other tables too, but the
> option is supposed to be specific to an individual completion table,
> then we have the same problem again.

And an alternative to add separate options to all these tables
doesn't look more attractive.