Re: Possible minibuffer completion enhancements

[Madhu <enometh@meer.net>]

* Daniel Mendler  <87a5ox7png.fsf@daniel-mendler.de> :
Wrote on Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:12:19 +0100:
> Iirc Stefan Monnier had plans to change the implementation of the
> completion machinery, rebasing it on a cl-defgeneric mechanism, where
> completion tables provide cl-defmethods. If more and more additional
> completion candidate metadata is supplied, looking into this again may
> be worthwhile.

Does this mean I have to restart emacs every time one has to undefine a
method?  elisp has already disclaimed support any form of class
redefinition.

This is a disturbing trend that has been shepherded into emacs by Eli in
other areas too.

There was a comment in another thread about how COND* was a NIH reaction
to PCASE. I haven't seen stallman's response but I think problem is that
COND* was not invented first and is a shoving down on elisp of
constructs and patterns in languages that fundamentally are hostile to
lisp, and now elisp is being dragged down the path again.


Elisp implementations of cl-defclass and cl-defgeneric are deficient in
well understood ways.  the campaign seems to drag the language of elisp
away from the freedom of lisp culture and replace that the culture with
a culture which shapes programmers who have been conditioned for a
different type of market which exploits that lack of freedom (through
derivative investments)