From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: BIKESHED: completion faces Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ftjd6gbu.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87blu18zsg.fsf@gmail.com> <87sgncqydt.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="213307"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: =?windows-1252?B?Sm/jbyBU4XZvcmE=?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 29 02:13:09 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPG4K-000tLc-Ib for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:13:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47926 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iPG4I-0008OH-Ph for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45810) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iPG4B-0008Ni-PF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:13:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPG4A-0006jt-BX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:34038) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPG4A-0006jK-2v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:58 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D91ED8126E; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:56 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8A08E80B69; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:53 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1572311573; bh=hXJNT3Lk5brzSmkABtsp5yHIZkmLuXnchNeErlszyDg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=jQVNpg7WICTkdXi+TGCj8KkTzVM1bQN8t/F/ORSBgguP7vskNt//cjDcYPirV2RpH C5Phg+2AWBeOtNioUCxjAAr38BjYvnfx1anLEEEWoYm7bML0jxTFlw/UImeKJL4Bgw L50fBV+tqRsttTQcVHYdRc5VudaLJ16tWGLKL3aWV71OY0ZG6AaHJvMIhb4HLVoKss OQF91ETwUh4KlpWsKwb1Q2qyiGkzjR83A6wMVZvB5pYXv7RhcUximFiivxxYowSmSn RnSKlAuApb9AJFPNc9yJxGfsX8svXLd7QxDyv1L0zg7EHnL3Dd17FkicFoa4H+3jDt UU3c75AojTpgg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.255.86]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10F8512039E; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:12:53 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87sgncqydt.fsf@mail.linkov.net> (Juri Linkov's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2019 00:29:18 +0200") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:241572 Archived-At: >>> bold in completions-first-difference helps to immediately see the >>> next character to type to narrow completions further. >> >> Yes, but some questions, Juri: >> * wouldn't any other face, say "underline", serve the same purpose? > underline is less noticeable than bold, when used on a single character > with completions-first-difference in the "basic" completion style. I kind of like the underline for first-difference because it is similar to the underline used in some toolkit's menus to indicate which key-shortcut to use to select this entry. >> * In completion styles other than "basic", there are many other >> characters, besides the one marked with completions-first-difference, >> that you type to narrow completion further, right? > Other completion styles don't highlight completions-first-difference > at all. Apparently it's now the case on `master` but it's a (hopefully temporary) regression: it definitely worked for `substring` and `partial-completion` (and I see no reason why it can't work for `flex` as well) and it makes just as much sense there as for `basic` completion, if you ask me. I think it's the `completion-common-part` highlighting which is influenced by the completion style: its highlighting is much less important/useful for `basic` completion and than for more complex completion styles. > Is it possible to use bold for completions-first-difference only > in the "basic" completion style, but for other completion styles > to use bold for completions-common-part? I don't think we could/should make the faces's aspect depend on the completion style used. But the `basic` completion style could use different faces than `substring`, `flex`, `initials`, and `partial-completion`, yes. This said, since the default completion uses sometimes `basic` and sometimes `partial-completion`, I think it would be odd to have the *Completions* use different highlighting on a case-by-case basis. Stefan