From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stepping Back: A Wealth Of Completion systems Re: [ELPA] New package: vertico Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:18:47 +0200 Message-ID: <871rbh6pd4.fsf@posteo.net> References: <9c9af088-580f-9fb1-4d79-237a74ce605c@inventati.org> <874kgkxxs0.fsf@posteo.net> <87blamp5hy.fsf@posteo.net> <2ce73f33-8675-211a-9eb7-ea63de1a161e@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23568"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: 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 13:20:27 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 1lVY8h-00062J-Eg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:20:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38842 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVY8g-0008Oq-GC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 07:20:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39984) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVY7C-0007vt-1g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 07:18:54 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:33235) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lVY79-0007Hf-RV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 07:18:53 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED3BF1A023E for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:18:48 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1618139929; bh=vBjnuva7lU0jQsvKG3CPWzvuGCQydiLyjBlBBkLEuMQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=Cy//OdmKmDwLMvB7aTtrCGxvj6h2RgpX4gDePrSlA3OpZ99FVNS1ZP6rFk8p06/6c Nf8RYXUst9FTiKFh/UQgSQ8e7UCoJSqJBmtxwD9P7z4dPucZvsN/kLj7R1CNAzY2SK MxLYDNxLSiFT2v/kiqGvDU+d4N9K2Oq+IDYpjotlg3dnxt+1Y8F2FnY2sul/g9RwcJ ctybzjd8tTA++hfSgQFNEdXFACIIiSl41zXwf53PKsYL01onxIwbhdgXVH1AC+I9Bh Blz/TuC7JHekXrH8xjKaAiimjUReWlfytKAqwRFd7SUc0/rEnJMOdaeZCSBo58kdt+ nq7jyMUL+AJhw== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4FJ8WX3TT7z6tm9; Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:18:48 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <2ce73f33-8675-211a-9eb7-ea63de1a161e@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Sun, 11 Apr 2021 03:18:41 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:267866 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: > - It uses data structures quite different from what completing-read > uses. That's pretty inconvenient, and requires a mental switch. I'd > rather the two functions (or some future versions of them) were more > similar in shape, yet (obviously) different in behavior. I think it would be possible to also support alists, hash tables, vectors but I'm not sure if it is necessary. Functions might be interesting to consider. But this raises a more general question, of whether selecting-read and completing-read should be drop-in replacements of one another. I would hesitate, as completing-read isn't the cleanest interface. Instead it might be cleaner to also provide a compatibility function with the same interface as completing-read to translate into selecting-read. > - It's not pretty/comfortable to use (yet?). A lot of discussion and > decisions might come from trying reaching the state where people > like it. > > Speaking of what I see in selecting-read-mode-map, in particular > > (define-key map (kbd "/") #'selecting-read-narrow) > > , it invokes the image of a more ponderous, explicit interaction than > the snappy selection UIs I've used and liked in the past. Of course, this was the product of maybe 1-2 hours of programming. I don't have much experience with designing Emacs UIs, so I didn't get much done. Ideally the UI should either be configurable or multiple UIs should be provided to please every taste. >> Because I'm not just now primarily concerned with what completing-read > might look like, it doesn't do "automatic narrowing" like Helm or > Ivy. > > It doesn't do quick cycling with TAB either, though. Yes, I'd like to have that too, but I first wanted to get some comments on the internal architecture, before I spend more time with the UI. -- Philip K.