From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] (icomplete-vertical-mode): Add support for affixations and, annotations Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 15:24:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87pmxhb1rs.fsf@gmail.com> <23510125-37b9-e87e-3590-5322f44772ce@daniel-mendler.de> <87y2c5nhsr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87h7irss50.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <43d1599e-2ba9-2efb-45c3-76c67d29a69d@daniel-mendler.de> <87tumrgqrb.fsf@gmail.com> <87tumq92pe.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87lf82g10g.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2c24lww.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <871r9t2lsy.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <22880197-6d05-c821-2c58-328ed3cfc02e@daniel-mendler.de> <87eedruui3.fsf@gmail.com> <8dd915fe-fe67-2a45-67ff-8aaa3e9b9aca@daniel-mendler.de> <878s3zuq47.fsf@gmail.com> <09f2a253-84ba-5cfd-552e-0b89109864a5@daniel-mendler.de> <875yyxaoxp.fsf@gmail.com> <87lf7t8wfz.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38195"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_T=C3=A1vora?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 01 17:26:52 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lo6I8-0009hh-Kw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 17:26:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33848 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lo6I7-0008Nm-Lz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 11:26:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42454) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lo6Fx-0003lr-9u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 11:24:37 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:49460) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lo6Fr-0000jC-DJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 11:24:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1622561069; bh=AuwtnWKUgeCRNxKAR2tfRt2YF4E85eR4LTeC10bJ+ao=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=qfKXcxCDQ6TV+NiEcFKNEtJHzk6Hn+EJt5wRob1WycROw7NhZYSs2GFRcx6N7qP3t IT8o97/P36vlzZVBPc2lRX3xgLCD3mNS75CqciPSLqbSIvatW8iqTQtG2WliO0kGAn E12PWG1+tSKCNA6tnWiCs8PRdGznb6aCL1b5iB/BR+JTAkBgFgNTy2wh+9/YlfDLAt 6uXbNTakD4p9JgELg5D0PEzaJPD6kp8rIa26F3+OXvtUV5wXfIfb/CDoOCRRut+4Cx ClOBzmej2pz2/HGSxzmKIjzJfZ5XvxE3OqCPL/DWuJdenKiE7SQ5h/FXlfVEUcrKRG yG1wROuiwj0KA== In-Reply-To: <87lf7t8wfz.fsf@gmail.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:270204 Archived-At: > > Why do you think the code is not modular enough? Previously, it mixed > vertical and non-vertical mode with a bunch of ifs, now vertical mode is > handled in its own function. Not ideal, but at least more modular to > me. > > You seem to be conflating the ability to configure a system with the > modularity of its implementation in code. > I did not say it's "less modular", I said it is "not modular enough". > > Who do you think doesn't want to see those numbers? You personally? > I do not want to see these numbers indeed, and again I'd be surprised if I were the only one. IMO displaying that information wastes CPU cycles for no good reason. > > A hook is a variable, and considerably more complex than a boolean. > Why is that better here and how would it solve the problem? > It is better because other users can define other functions in their init files and use them instead of the default ones. >> As I feared, the code to scroll the candidates list does not work >> correctly alas. I've put lots of efforts to make "icomplete-vertical" >> work correctly in virtually every possible case, so I find this very >> regrettable. For example, with frame-height = 47, 10 candidates are >> displayed, yet the candidates list rotates on the 7th candidate >> (instead of the 11th one). > > This is by design. Works like Vertico and many other completers. > We can and should do better than other completers. > > Can't reproduce this, I see it scroll on the third visual candidate. > > [...] > > I also can't reproduce these two cases, not with Emacs -Q. Maybe you're > using some extra configuration? What? > No, I'm using emacs -Q (on Debian GNU/Linux with GTK in case it matters). >> If I start working on this (again), I would likely change most of your >> code into something else, and it would take some time, because it's a >> difficult problem. Would you agree with this? > > First say what you would want to change it to, and why. > I explained it above.