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: Recommendation for CAPF setup when you don't know completion string in advance Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2021 19:49:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39557"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: JD Smith Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 04 01:50:29 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 1lSq28-000AAb-Hj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 01:50:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33278 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lSq27-00086U-Jo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2021 19:50:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44098) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lSq1U-0007gM-7E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2021 19:49:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:41604) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lSq1R-0006jr-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2021 19:49:46 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EC4ED801B5; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 19:49:43 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9591A80695; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 19:49:42 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1617493782; bh=ol648zRlMCyr/VUuhhxPatBXDCTvwpl7tUaMecIya4U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=cPH74E9D2zbMYSP5fSlvTO+V5w54BHpJi39/V9O26JgbBqt6rghpHB+6uW5PJCQD8 ikCRrAfYo0+TCcd7JGKUiqkoRIevT30IXaBd8HnaVict2KoLTVVdjDE1o3vxaS7D3x Rh+J7Phiepl3fIGPxJ2Dwu2w7+7PPvxgbMz1XHgnL7D2D1tWXjqxtlt04LhHvLqYl1 CQueoLxz3orxCGKbpATOf8zO7iUaeekE21eBDxIALsQZhSg8lnE8WTuTD/jiDFsw24 uMMX46+cA97IZsNxdr9lAwGqiOxVc1EcBBxX445BH1u3PECTd+OGO9ZbsRUNIiyXpz l1pPhUcf/0Ibg== Original-Received: from alfajor (104-222-126-84.cpe.teksavvy.com [104.222.126.84]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B08F120289; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 19:49:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (JD Smith's message of "Sat, 3 Apr 2021 18:23:28 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca 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:267370 Archived-At: > So it=E2=80=99s a quandary: I won=E2=80=99t yet know `beg=E2=80=99 and `e= nd=E2=80=99 until _after_ > interacting with iPython. Is there any way to =E2=80=9Crevise=E2=80=9D = =E2=80=98beg=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98end=E2=80=99 in > a collection function returned from a CAPF? Indeed, that's a problem. You might be able to get away with the following: Make your CAPF function return a beg..end that covers "the whole line" and which returns a completion table in the form of a function. That function will then defer to the iPython code for the grunt of its work and will return the "real" boundaries via the `completion-boundaries` method. This will probably require some caching in the completion table so we don't call iPython too many times for a single completion (like once for `completion-boundaries`, once for `try-completion`, once for `all-completions`, etc...). The completion is written under the assumption that `completion-boundaries` is cheaper to perform than `all-completions`, so there's a risk it won't work very well, but my intuition tells me it should work "well enough". Stefan