Re: Timing of input-method output

[phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord)]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> Oh dear, that really does seem nasty to me.
>
> ;-)
>
>> I wonder if I am going about this in the wrong way. Given that this only
>> happens when quail is active, is it not quail that needs hooking?
>> "pre-quail-command-hook" or something.  Quail knows that it's about to do
>> something weird that is not going to signal pre-command-hook because we
>> are still awaiting more information before the command happens.
>
> Yeah, it's probably better to try and hack Quail to better cooperate.
>
>> If it works, it would mean that input-event-functions is not really fit
>> for the purpose I intended and should, perhaps, be removed.
>
> When you added it, I thought you had already confirmed that it satisfies
> your needs.  But if it doesn't, then maybe it's not a good hook.


Well, I had checked that it did do what I wanted, in terms of stopping
the buggy completion display. I hadn't checked that it didn't break
the completion in the first place. Oh dear.

I'll remove this and see if I can fix up quail instead with a hook
there. As you say, perhaps the ultimate fix is to change quail to enter
information in a different way, but one step at a time.

Phil