From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "T.V Raman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stepping Back: A Wealth Of Completion systems Re: [ELPA] New package: vertico Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 09:40:12 -0700 Message-ID: References: <9c9af088-580f-9fb1-4d79-237a74ce605c@inventati.org> <874kgkxxs0.fsf@posteo.net> <78741fe6-2612-d7c9-2bc4-0b68ea7fa51a@yandex.ru> <76a4d0e2-117b-165d-d56e-5bc2f504b50c@yandex.ru> <87blapln0r.fsf@posteo.net> <37bd2e96-ce04-eb6d-24da-fdd7ea427e61@yandex.ru> <87im4wx2ct.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb18030 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30615"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Dmitry Gutov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 08 18:42:01 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 1lUXjD-0007ps-KT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 18:41:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50324 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUXjC-0002Ma-KT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 12:41:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50762) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUXhg-0000nB-QR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 12:40:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pf1-x42c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c]:44577) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUXhe-00064Q-EJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 12:40:24 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pf1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id m11so2224556pfc.11 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 09:40:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2YmvyBsF9RCNzpVT2N3x35EncYfVA8B2iL+G/m2JElI=; b=Z9/AJNjgDxxz535rAEERSU5DXABvFFsOEVkVsLeg39MtR1hCdk6mwTLuTlVJFzniMQ AsjMymBW7K6745pqtBFtMnSeNQKx95+ktNy8lfFpsBPZ7y8qaGDYcVHpSHXi+PqI7Z+y fAwJ6XuUeBW+UCpIZubw1BK/U5P1x68RGWkFvbe9Wa4VFTPreHpEunSlK9kSXm8TpPYQ ssiI2mTV/doXmx3hwF0BD8eYpDa2VysEMfOgEBohm+qzMY0eTqIosca+5qekDZBSQ5Ch 1Asu5iOJcdqKWNRY1aI4yd1w0iyhMBhjcBmUJmXjJNPu+wPgZwwX3l2YHZth4p56VIbL hK7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2YmvyBsF9RCNzpVT2N3x35EncYfVA8B2iL+G/m2JElI=; b=bcPa26EUUAOGMxioKEe/K1Hjyj3FEiVtiAXJ8VNe2972wPumnk91JnrdmuwkCb+v8O DM6EJOWjyKKGfzTW6U6lQGWMu6Ia4m4U7NrruGBUe3vdHH9NcZBVk3pc0dyuAbMoNyei TqAGu65yM3wrJiNhuI/pSEc1O/el1FjPerxdpvTvrJZpaNv0UgDDf1gj6MWy6m5S8mMw /LL0qyBzWFdbo5jKUpjcvGCPcSIUsWqbILi7fpzLpJicPmMN6aFxw7bt4RARl2GqRs3J 8ODwBTSrhgVQ98M0ipEgvgMmyg9DkyRhQpZXgn3AgBx2c+vt6FvOD+PssKldMU1oZ47E /g+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531vbyVBMwKJTnzxQNo+vPitQMp5NPVxw71JtHtllWXLSPnodR91 ebQcnYjVUnuWYKq6fzRk/WVRdyExY0T6Mw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzyGMYT+wlENCeQrJlSAlKTilTLc9GgtMqbQ0SDUBLBL/i/cXSeM9skTm5lR9JFFkBcZlMZTA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:dc57:: with SMTP id f23mr7505989pgj.294.1617900014469; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 09:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from raman-glaptop.localdomain (c-24-4-174-65.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.4.174.65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c14sm22104pfj.46.2021.04.08.09.40.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 08 Apr 2021 09:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by raman-glaptop.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 13930) id A7FACC217B3; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 09:40:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87im4wx2ct.fsf@posteo.net> (Philip Kaludercic's message of "Thu, 08 Apr 2021 16:44:34 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::42c; envelope-from=raman@google.com; helo=mail-pf1-x42c.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -175 X-Spam_score: -17.6 X-Spam_bar: ----------------- X-Spam_report: (-17.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5 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:267630 Archived-At: Philip Kaludercic writes: In the spirit of exerimentation I'd second what Stefan suggested, Step 1: Create a selection oriented equivalent of completing-read 2. See how that works out -- 3. Then, compare it with completing-read -- and see if we can derive a master composite function that handles both use-cases well. completing-read has been around for a long time which means: The good -- it has withstood the test of time -- and possibly bad: it's constraining with respect to backward compatibility and trying new things. We've now experimented in Emacs with entire packages trying to offer alternatives; let's now use that learning to move toward building the correct lower-level support functions, and the suggestion above is trying to be the next step in that process =20=20=20 > >> On 08.04.2021 01:59, Philip Kaludercic wrote: >>> Dmitry Gutov writes: >>>=20 >>>> What I was disagreeing in the previous message, is whether it's worth >>>> to create a semantic distinction between completing-read and >>>> selecting-read. How would a Lisp author choose between the two? The >>>> former should actually be more powerful (it will retain support for >>>> TAB completion, and yet it could still be supported by selection-style >>>> frameworks such as Company or Ivy); >>> completing-read can be more powerful, as it includes expanding text >>> and >>> selecting items, but I if you are not interested in text-expansion you >>> should probably limit yourself to selection, >> >> Am "I" in this example the user, or the author of the caller code? > > The I was probably a typo. > >>> so that everyone is ensured >>> to have the same presentation. >> >> If that's the goal, why don't we make sure to include a "selection" >> interface that supports text-expansion as well, like both Company and=20 >> Ivy do? >> >> What's the purpose of having that distinction? > > My hypothisis is that selection is held back by completing-read, and > that a framework that is explicitly made for selection and not > retrofitted into the existing framework could stand to improve the user > experience. --=20 Thanks, --Raman =817=A94 Id: kg:/m/0285kf1 =950=DC8