From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: BIKESHED: completion faces Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 00:29:18 +0200 Organization: LINKOV.NET Message-ID: <87sgncqydt.fsf@mail.linkov.net> References: <87ftjd6gbu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87blu18zsg.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="241086"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o_T=E1vora?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 29 00:04:54 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPE4D-0010al-P7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 00:04:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45116 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iPE4B-0005Hu-RA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:04:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54870) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iPE3G-0004W4-7Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:03:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPE0e-0000zH-Ej for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:01:13 -0400 Original-Received: from azure.elm.relay.mailchannels.net ([23.83.212.7]:12032) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPE0e-0000yT-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:01:12 -0400 X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|jurta@jurta.org Original-Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762B05E2267; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 23:01:09 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-85-194.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.85.194]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F2DC35E2259; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 23:01:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|jurta@jurta.org Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a29.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Mon, 28 Oct 2019 23:01:09 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|jurta@jurta.org X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Ski-Squirrel: 6748a5fe20abd5dd_1572303669223_3297672643 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1572303669223:4110780838 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1572303669223 Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACD1A98ED5; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:01:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=linkov.net; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=linkov.net; bh=bmP5uXaqu3DGpQ8aorDWcz/cBck=; b= w0egMjTE8psbmvX8YTcUB8Tp7e4IfLHgQigwkbr/9CwFuCd1TUX0GeMjM6IVOt9I EwGYe7URPT3+O12HEZFd2D0mWecXf0vCDn3IcmEcFr8CKk6SJKhvsGEzqZsdldvy XvMGCxGBb+Z4ONPLvVOTpMirtpaly9rE7of1c1A0BVk= Original-Received: from mail.jurta.org (m91-129-101-77.cust.tele2.ee [91.129.101.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jurta@jurta.org) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3EB43995C7; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:01:00 -0700 (PDT) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a29 In-Reply-To: <87blu18zsg.fsf@gmail.com> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Jo=E3o_T=E1vora?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22's?= message of "Mon, 28 Oct 2019 00:43:59 +0000") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 23.83.212.7 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:241564 Archived-At: >> bold in completions-first-difference helps to immediately see the >> next character to type to narrow completions further. > > > > Yes, but some questions, Juri: > > * wouldn't any other face, say "underline", serve the same purpose? underline is less noticeable than bold, when used on a single character with completions-first-difference in the "basic" completion style. > * would you not be equally and efficiently informed of such facts if > completions-common-part were _more_ prominent and > completions-first-difference was _less_ prominent? In the "basic" completion style completions-first-difference needs to be more prominent since it's more important to indicate the next character to type. > * In completion styles other than "basic", there are many other > characters, besides the one marked with completions-first-difference, > that you type to narrow completion further, right? Other completion styles don't highlight completions-first-difference at all. I'm not sure if only the "basic" completion style highlights completions-first-difference. Is it possible to use bold for completions-first-difference only in the "basic" completion style, but for other completion styles to use bold for completions-common-part?