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: Usability suggestion : completion for M-: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:44 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ejaei4iz.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87hcf7r7vl.fsf@jurta.org> <003001c886f5$366f4330$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com> <874pb7ikt7.fsf@jurta.org> <000501c8873d$4ff68550$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000701c88785$bd26dce0$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com> <87d4puxx2b.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <20080316210712.12aafb17@reforged> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205760840 528 80.91.229.12 (17 Mar 2008 13:34:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:34:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Mike Mattie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 17 14:34:28 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 1JbFTX-0005Ct-3r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:34:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbFSx-0007de-Cq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:33:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbFSJ-0006sw-Ak for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:47 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JbFSH-0006po-FU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JbFSH-0006pZ-9t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:45 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JbFSH-00073X-1j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:45 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAOwP3kdMCrTo/2dsb2JhbACnJoEK X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,512,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="16136578" Original-Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 17 Mar 2008 09:32:44 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([76.10.180.232]) by smtp.pppoe.ca (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id XQX57444; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:44 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 48E0B8F79; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:32:44 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080316210712.12aafb17@reforged> (Mike Mattie's message of "Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:07:12 -0700") 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:92825 Archived-At: >> - if the indentation code always makes changes (e.g. because it cycles >> through several possible indentation points), then completion is >> never used. > Can you post the code ? I have a similar setup, but I can't remember > running into that particular problem before. Because you don't use code written in languages where indentation is significant, maybe? (e.g. Haskell and Python) > The biggest issue I noticed with overloaded commands is that Emacs > commands will inspect this-command. An overloaded command > needs to adjust these sorts of variables so other code isn't adversely > affected. Some parts of Emacs definitely don't appreciate the current > command being a lambda either. That's just a minor implementation issue, which wouldn't both us, since we have control over the rest of the code as well. >> - if the completion code only gets called when you repeat TAB, then >> well... you have to repeat TAB to get to completion. >> - if not, then you get surprising results when you do TAB C-n TAB C-n >> ... intending to reindent a chunk of code and once of the lines >> happens to be properly indented already and you end up >> completing instead. >> >> So it's not a satisfactory solution. > I definitely have a different implementation that sounds more robust. > I hit tab repeatedly and the result is always the same in regards to > the behavior selected. What's the behavior? When does it indent and when does it complete? Stefan