From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: Ergus <spacibba@aol.com>
Cc: Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
"emacs-devel@gnu.org" <emacs-devel@gnu.org>,
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
Subject: RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 02:23:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SJ0PR10MB548847DAA1D018B871178B9AF30F9@SJ0PR10MB5488.namprd10.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220313233800.44vfuwjje6wgsdm2@Ergus>
> Man, please relax...
Oh, I'm relaxed. Believe me, Man. ;-)
> The user experience is exactly the same than before. Just that now
> there is an option to change, suppress or/and get a counter with the
> total number of completions
I already welcomed that, in a previous message.
It's helpful to tell users how many completions
there are.
(I suggested that the *Completions* mode-line
might be a better place for it.)
> where there was before just a bit superfluous
> hard-coded message: "Possible completions are:"
>
> That's it. Everything else is exactly the same.
My message wasn't about your addition of the
number of matches at the top of *Completions*
(when there _are_ matches).
> >> > Why would we ever say "0 possible completions"?
> >> > Why bother with "possible"? We never show
> >> > IMpossible completions, do we?
> >> >
> >> > When there are no matches we just tell users
> >> > there's no match. Always have. Simple.
> >
> >And your answer is?
>
> Because the original message was: "Possible
> completions are:" and it has been there since
> ever without hearing your complains about that
> the completions are not IMpossible.
I don't see "Possible completions are:" when there
are no completions. What I see is that window
*Completions* is removed when you try to complete
a pattern that has no matches.
(Granted, I'm looking at the latest release, 27.2,
not any new work-in-progress. But you say this
thing I don't see has been there forever, so I'm
perplexed. We must not be smoking the same thing.)
My point was that, compared to the vanilla, age-old
behavior of removing the *Completions* window when
you try to match an unmatchable pattern, a proposed
new behavior of continuing to show *Completions*,
but with a message at the top saying "0 possible
completions" (or any other wording of that), sounds
like a step backward, to me. That's all. Just one
opinion.
(And I don't even use the vanilla *Completions*
behavior. I just happen to care about Emacs beyond
my own use of it.)
> I don't care anything about one word at all and if
> the user doesn't like the word or you want to put
> there "Drews completions are:", at least now
> you have an option to customize it as you prefer...
I don't want to put anything there. I'm asking why
we'd want to show a buffer that lists no completions,
instead of just removing that window. I'm asking
why that would be an improvement - or even a good
option to offer.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-14 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20220309001013.gxyh2uasbuxiz6ww.ref@Ergus>
2022-03-09 0:10 ` Question about completion behavior Ergus
2022-03-09 0:22 ` Stefan Monnier
2022-03-09 1:46 ` Ergus
2022-03-09 3:05 ` Stefan Monnier
2022-03-09 3:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2022-03-09 10:11 ` Ergus
2022-03-09 11:46 ` Ergus
2022-03-09 13:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2022-03-09 13:46 ` Po Lu
2022-03-09 17:32 ` Stefan Monnier
2022-03-09 17:41 ` Ergus
2022-03-10 0:42 ` Po Lu
2022-03-10 10:21 ` Ergus
2022-03-10 11:15 ` Po Lu
2022-03-10 14:03 ` Ergus
2022-03-10 18:50 ` Juri Linkov
2022-03-10 22:35 ` Ergus
2022-03-12 18:31 ` Juri Linkov
2022-03-13 14:58 ` Ergus
2022-03-12 0:17 ` Ergus
2022-03-12 18:34 ` Juri Linkov
2022-03-13 11:21 ` Ergus
2022-03-13 17:44 ` Juri Linkov
2022-03-13 18:50 ` Ergus
2022-03-13 18:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2022-03-13 19:49 ` Ergus
2022-03-13 20:48 ` [External] : " Drew Adams
2022-03-13 21:15 ` Ergus
2022-03-13 23:14 ` Drew Adams
2022-03-13 23:38 ` Ergus
2022-03-14 2:23 ` Drew Adams [this message]
2022-03-12 20:25 ` Drew Adams
2022-03-09 14:30 ` Ergus
2022-03-09 16:14 ` [PATCH] " Ergus
2022-03-09 16:56 ` Eli Zaretskii
2022-03-09 13:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2022-03-09 14:22 ` Ergus
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=SJ0PR10MB548847DAA1D018B871178B9AF30F9@SJ0PR10MB5488.namprd10.prod.outlook.com \
--to=drew.adams@oracle.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=juri@linkov.net \
--cc=luangruo@yahoo.com \
--cc=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca \
--cc=spacibba@aol.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).