From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Masatake YAMATO Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emphasize the character to be typed next in *Completions* Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:55:10 +0900 (JST) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <20040322.185510.266153697.jet@gyve.org> References: <20040322053942.03A2467DC4@imf.math.ku.dk> <405EB27E.6020904@math.ku.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1079949387 19366 80.91.224.253 (22 Mar 2004 09:56:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 09:56:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 22 10:56:16 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B5MAK-0003xG-00 for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:56:16 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B5MAK-0002eV-00 for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:56:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B5MA4-000878-Rm for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:56:00 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B5M9y-00086c-Np for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:55:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B5M9R-000803-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:55:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [210.130.136.40] (helo=r-maa.spacetown.ne.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B5M9R-0007zY-5Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 04:55:21 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([219.120.63.249]) by r-maa.spacetown.ne.jp (8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2M9tBw02740; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 18:55:11 +0900 (JST) Original-To: larsh@math.ku.dk In-Reply-To: <405EB27E.6020904@math.ku.dk> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.0.62 on Emacs 21.3.50 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:20720 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:20720 > >That could be a clever idea. Others: do you like this feature? > > > > > IMHO it would be better with a highlighting like the one in incremental > search, i.e. highlight the part of the possible completions that match > what is in the minibuffer. It gives the same information to the user, > but is more familiar. I also implemented a version which highlights the common perfix string in completions. And I felt that the visual feedback is too strong. The situation is similar to incremental search a space; all the spaces are highlighted in the buffer; too many part of a buffer is highlighted. The user may feel where one's eyes focus on in the completions buffer. I also implemented a version which drops shadow on the common perfix string in completions. Dropping shadow means put a face which foreground is dark gray on the string. I felt that it is just indistinct. Putting bold face on a character has good balance between too much highlighting and indistinct representation. >>From my view, Using box face property or underline face property may be good...but I have not tried yet. Should I provide all versions and make them choose-able?