From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Completion with (:exclusive 'no) is called twice, and doesn't pass over on sole completion. Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87haxoyff9.fsf@gmail.com> <87sjh8wdbw.fsf@gmail.com> <87haxmx0o7.fsf@gmail.com> <87d38aw8u1.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1332085359 31907 80.91.229.3 (18 Mar 2012 15:42:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Vitalie Spinu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 18 16:42:34 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S9IFe-0007ot-Ou for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 16:42:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55628 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S9IFe-0000mb-6r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40443) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S9IFb-0000m6-29 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S9IFZ-0005Wr-CI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:30 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:26000) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S9IFZ-0005Wl-8A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:29 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAKU/KE9soXdS/2dsb2JhbACBX5x7eYhwnhmGGQSbGYQJ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,1,1325480400"; d="scan'208";a="168733065" Original-Received: from 108-161-119-82.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([108.161.119.82]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 18 Mar 2012 11:42:27 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 0DEA759442; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 11:42:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87d38aw8u1.fsf@gmail.com> (Vitalie Spinu's message of "Sun, 18 Mar 2012 10:35:02 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.183 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:149120 Archived-At: > Yes, and no. What I meant is that the underlying mechanisms are very > different. 99.99% of the time the completion candidates are the same, > but there are objects which are not meaningful to cache, like arguments > of the user functions, or components of the recursive structures (lists, > environments, data.frames etc.). In this cases AC also calls the > process, and it's usually fast. But in some extreme corner cases, like > if user changed a function in an attached package, AC will still use the > cached version.' So, IIUC it would be perfectly OK for TAB completion to use the AC code. >> Hmm... more consistency in the naming might be good here, indeed. >> It's important to keep the "-" prefix since I don't want to >> consider all of this as part of Emacs's "core", but maybe we could >> settle on "-completion-at-point-function" or maybe something >> shorter than that. > I am a fan of the -completion postfix convention. It's easy to match in > apropos, anything or IDO regexp: comint-filename-completion, > tags-completion, imenu-completion, imenu-in-same-mode-completion, > words-in-same-buffer-commpletion etc. It can get pretty long by itself, > so a short postfix is better. But I suspect it will generate false positives because it's not specific enough. Maybe "-completion-data"? Stefan