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: Who uses "complete word" (aka SPC) in the minibuffer and how/why Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87zlt4uas6.fsf@freemail.hu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207945100 4039 80.91.229.12 (11 Apr 2008 20:18:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:18:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "paul r" , Magnus Henoch Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 11 22:18:53 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JkPi0-0007qC-7u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:18:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JkPhM-0003HX-Ac for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JkPhH-0003HB-Lq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JkPhC-0003Ai-Us for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JkPhC-0003Af-Qp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:02 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182] helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JkPhC-0004B8-Hi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:02 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjoFAAhk/0fO+KV8/2dsb2JhbACBXaoD X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,643,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="18369435" Original-Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca (HELO smtp.teksavvy.com) ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 11 Apr 2008 16:18:01 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([206.248.165.124]) by smtp.teksavvy.com (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id RYD55001; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:01 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 4468C8C11; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:18:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (paul r.'s message of "Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:58:36 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:94997 Archived-At: >> I use it with M-x, especially when I want to run a command that is >> shadowed by a shorter one, e.g. customize-variable (shadowed by >> customize) and mail-add-payment-async (shadowed by mail-add-payment). >> At the end of the common part I hit SPC to get completion of the longer >> command. >> >> I could do this with the sequence TAB and '-' too, but that would be one >> extra keypress. > Same here, and I like it. I find it smart to use for completion a key > that is unlikely to make sens as self-insert. And to be honest, - is a > pain to hit on my keyboard. So, in any case the "word" part of the completion behavior is not something which you use? To make it clear: minibuffer-complete-word has 2 main differences with minibuffer-complete: 1 - if there's no completion, it tries to add a " " or a "-". 2 - it only completes a single word at a time. E.g. M-x fill-region- TAB => fill-region-as-paragraph M-x fill-region- SPC => fill-region-as- So you like 1 but you don't seem to be using 2. Does anyone care about the part 2 of the behavior of minibuffer-complete-word? If not, that's great: it's the part that's nasty to implement and I'd be happy to scrap it (or at least let it fail when it's too difficult to make it work). Stefan