From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs completion matches selection UI Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 15:00:25 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <871u2aetd2.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> References: <87fvqtg02v.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <877gc5fm30.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87k3g47m7b.fsf@yandex.ru> <528B6F11.7070607@yandex.ru> <87y54ke8v3.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87li0kdrsz.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87d2lveu6x.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <8761rndkps.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1384977599 10511 80.91.229.3 (20 Nov 2013 19:59:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 19:59:59 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 20 21:00:04 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDwO-0004LY-CM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 21:00:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56782 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDwO-0002Pn-4F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 15:00:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41317) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDwF-0002PQ-Vq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:59:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDwA-0005Ed-5c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:59:51 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:36958) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDwA-0005ER-0T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:59:46 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VjDw9-0004CR-AK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 20:59:45 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 20:59:45 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 20:59:45 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 40 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:MPrpniDl1yIetA6NTNX37/zgev0= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165456 Archived-At: On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 14:10:18 -0500 Stefan Monnier wrote: >>>> That, and to also highlight the portion of the selected entry that >>>> matches if the match is partial. SM> Hmm... don't we do that already? >> Not from in-buffer completion AFAICT. Yes from minibuffer completion. SM> I see the same highlighting for in-buffer completion as for SM> minibuffer completion. So please make a bug-report when you see SM> the problem. It's probably an in-buffer completion which still uses SM> ad-hoc code rather than relying on the completion-at-point SM> infrastructure. OK, I'll try to replicate it, thanks. >> After thinking about it, I agree with Josh. Proposal: >> 1) in minibuffer completion: >> `right' or `C-f' at minibuffer point-max enters completion candidates >> buffer (where then `up' and `down' are remapped, we have the user captive) >> `left' in the completion candidates buffer goes back to the minibuffer >> 2) in-buffer completion: >> enter completion candidates buffer immediately (where then `up' and >> `down' are remapped, we have the user captive). Make it easy to get out >> and back to the original buffer. SM> Maybe "enter immediately" is also an option for the minibuffer case. It would work for me. After `TAB' I expect either an immediate completion if there's just one candidate, or an error if there are none, or the completion candidates selection UI. SM> I agree that C-f at EOL in the minibuffer is a "safe" choice, but SM> I don't think that hijacking `up' and `down' would be problematic SM> either, because we'd only hijack them after displaying *Completions*, SM> and I expect users tend to rely on the history only *before* displaying SM> the *Completions*, but not so much afterwards. I understand now. Yes, that would work fine. Ted