> Good to see that the new branch avoids such hacks.  I tested it out,
and everything is nice.

Did you test the branch that me and Gregory are working
on off-list?

Probably we should be on-list.  The branch is
scratch/icomplete-vertical-mode-gregory-and-joao and it's
functionally equivalent to Gregory's last on-list patch but a bit
simpler and cleaner on the implementation.

C-n and C-p are supported, but indeed C-v and M-v are not.
It's a good idea to support them, yes. And maybe your idea is
the best way.  Feel free to add a commit or two to that branch.
Else, let's just push this simpler version to master.

João



On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 10:53 PM Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> wrote:

> >> The only problem I see this code is too hackish:
> >
> > It is (a bit) hackish because the output of icomplete-completions is (a
> > bit) hackish.
>
> Good to see that the new branch avoids such hacks.  I tested it out,
> and everything is nice.  After using it a while I noticed that one
> useful feature is missing, but it could be added later to not prevent
> merging the current version to master now.  What is missing is the
> scrolling commands that could be bound to C-v and M-v to scroll
> completions.
> For the simplest implementation, this means just to call
> icomplete-forward-completions
> N times where N is the height of the displayed completions list.
>
>

-- 
João Távora