From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>, Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com>
Cc: "18643@debbugs.gnu.org" <18643@debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: bug#18643: 25.0.50; elisp--expect-function-p
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 06:42:19 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <543F308B.4000504@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jwvzjcyqzfu.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org>
On 10/14/2014 10:32 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> I agree, we should try to handle both cases better. I.e. have a way to
> distinguish "the user explicitly requested completion, so try to come up
> with something" from the company case where we only want to auto pop up
> a completion menu if we're sufficiently confident that the suggestions
> are valuable.
The idea makes a certain amount of sense, but I'm not sure if "try to
come up with something" should be performed in contexts where other
completion functions are likely to be more valuable.
> Question is how to do it. One way I see we could do it is by adding
> a property to completion data (e.g. in the data returned by the
> completion-at-point-function) which says something like "unsure" or
> "low-quality" so we could ignore those when the user hasn't explicitly
> requested completion.
How will that interact with other elements in
completion-at-point-functions? Suppose there's another function there,
named ispell-complete-at-point. And suppose it always returns non-nil
when in strings or comments, which looks like a reasonable behavior.
Which function will be used in comment if the user explicitly requested
completion, and if lisp-completion-at-point returned `unsure'? Will that
depend on the order of the elements in c-a-p-f?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-16 2:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-06 5:13 bug#18643: 25.0.50; elisp--expect-function-p Leo Liu
2014-10-09 2:50 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-09 3:31 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-09 6:17 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-09 15:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-09 23:43 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-10 1:16 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-10 4:07 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-10 13:25 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-10 20:53 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-11 0:25 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-11 13:48 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-11 14:21 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-14 18:32 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-16 2:42 ` Dmitry Gutov [this message]
2014-10-16 13:10 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-11 13:47 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-11 16:18 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-14 18:34 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-16 2:35 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-16 3:36 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-16 9:59 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-11 0:16 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-10 3:56 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-10 4:33 ` Leo Liu
2014-10-11 16:31 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-10 3:34 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-10-10 13:20 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-10-11 17:07 ` Dmitry Gutov
2022-04-26 13:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2022-04-26 15:46 ` Leo Liu
2022-04-27 11:52 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=543F308B.4000504@yandex.ru \
--to=dgutov@yandex.ru \
--cc=18643@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA \
--cc=sdl.web@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.