From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: feature/icomplete-vertical Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:12 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200919015957.prffuac2jke3hp6a@Ergus> <20200919061531.oyjlbdvkbeif5fsg@Ergus> <20200919114359.7kph6xt2gdmah2pp@Ergus> <20200919154904.rrabgd37v57qrton@Ergus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19705"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Gregory Heytings , Eli Zaretskii , casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ergus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 19 18:50:16 2020 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 1kJg3z-0004zi-Gq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:50:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38746 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kJg3y-0002dk-F1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:50:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52028) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kJfIe-0006Jx-HW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:35599) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kJfIc-0007lK-5o; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:19 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B8D20441212; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:15 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 50B54441116; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:14 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1600531274; bh=/TIwpaTTm9He3bPN34jh+VaCkFPLiNj/dsLDs5q3z5c=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=UMGjRVDbvedElnkl3xyc151HZma9rAl7L7X9D9Pf0GEyzgGB28x5RWD5ULSko7d3Z WFuZp7qEbn6gRFdOdhyeCVH2d/7sc1ExA7ESdkW7fyBmO+KY4K1ZWV47NcYqf7EkGR MEriy1N1Zcvcbb9LT6KMJdV9rATfCAd0ErQQRuAnClczf/ueN3onsTYU5G4Z5HEeA8 wDrSq8gOyFzHAAdSFZ61AX7Lp0AATTbuQ1Qf0ytCk9O+ibjfVuGf/CWsl5nn3tq8ZI yRTpVd/EJGs2Nttoi2LTmY/MZQfHTKHJgC33viA0z82yostlrOLk8DjlcrhiqR3On9 3TG2hIlCiJxfg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.232.131]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B849D12021C; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:01:13 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20200919154904.rrabgd37v57qrton@Ergus> (Ergus's message of "Sat, 19 Sep 2020 17:49:04 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/19 11:35:17 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=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:256197 Archived-At: >>That can (and should) be fixed without having to reduce the number of >>candidates inserted in the (mini)buffer. > It will be great if you give me an idea about how to do that. You need to figure out why the redisplay decides to hide the prompt rather than some other part of the (mini)buffer. Usually, the deciding factor is the position of `point` (the redisplay tries hard to always keep `point` visible). Stefan