From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Updating *Completions* as you type Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:51:44 +0200 Organization: LINKOV.NET Message-ID: <86r0ki2on3.fsf@mail.linkov.net> References: <87bkd3z9bi.fsf@catern.com> <86r0lxm7um.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87sf6dx954.fsf@catern.com> <87ttqpwea9.fsf@catern.com> <86wmvlw178.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87bkcwx3ft.fsf@catern.com> <86y1g076vh.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87sf68unh1.fsf@catern.com> <86zg0fu99i.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <875y33v73h.fsf@catern.com> <87y1fztke8.fsf@catern.com> <86r0lrw17x.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87il5xlf9b.fsf@catern.com> <86y1esuajx.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86v89ws5t3.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86v89vzf1o.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87pm03jn3w.fsf@catern.com> <861qcjw3ch.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14287"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/30.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Cc: sbaugh@catern.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Spencer Baugh Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 22 09:15:06 2023 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 1r5iO1-0003Z2-MX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:15:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5iNG-0002q3-KZ; Wed, 22 Nov 2023 03:14:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5iNE-0002pp-Gz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Nov 2023 03:14:16 -0500 Original-Received: from relay8-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:dc4:8::228]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r5iNB-00015T-QA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Nov 2023 03:14:16 -0500 Original-Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E852A1BF20E; Wed, 22 Nov 2023 08:14:07 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: (Spencer Baugh's message of "Tue, 21 Nov 2023 15:45:20 -0500") X-GND-Sasl: juri@linkov.net Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2001:4b98:dc4:8::228; envelope-from=juri@linkov.net; helo=relay8-d.mail.gandi.net X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:313128 Archived-At: >>> - Again, the user is still able to configure the display-sort-function >>> by configuring the individual completion table. >> >> Does this mean that every individual completion table should have >> a separate user option? > > No: only the completion tables which specify a display-sort-function in > their metadata. All such completion tables should have a user option to > configure that display-sort-function. How then users could change the sorting order for individual tables that don't specify a display-sort-function to use an order different from completions-sort? > Well, yes. So then we agree that a user option for an individual > completion table, if it exists, should take precedence over > completion-category-overrides? The problem is that we can't distinguish two cases: 1. when display-sort-function is hard-coded in metadata by the author of the completion table; 2. when display-sort-function in metadata gets the value from the user option. Since we can't distinguish these cases, then it makes more sense when completion-category-overrides overrides everything: (alist-get 'display-sort-function (alist-get category completion-category-overrides)) (alist-get 'display-sort-function metadata) ;; metadata with/out individual options (alist-get 'display-sort-function (alist-get category completion-category-defaults)) There is no problem with this because completion-category-overrides is a user option as well, so everything still is under user control. > So then we're only disagreeing over whether such options should exist? Yes, I think we should add individual options only in exceptional cases. > These individual options would also provide a natural place to document > behavior like "if you configure the display-sort-function for buffer > completion to 'identity, then the buffer sort order will match > (buffer-list)". But the user could still make use of that information > by configuring the category. I agree that an option with documentation could help in such cases when a non-trivial sorting function is provided for a completion table. >> I see no need to add individual options as all. Every completion table >> that significantly differs from other tables so that it needs a separate >> display-sort-function, could provide a separate category. For example, >> there is a category 'buffer'. If 'switch-to-buffer' needs another >> display-sort-function it could provide a category 'buffer-for-switching'. > > That won't work with the scenario I described before with sorting > file-name completion by mtime, where changing the sorting requires also > changing the completion table. I agree that individual options are required in such rare cases when their values affect the completion table and its formatting. > Also, this would require adding a category for essentially every > completion table. For example, I see that read-from-kill-ring specifies > a display-sort-function, currently set to 'identity. It's much simpler to add an extra line with a category. > If we wanted to make that configurable, it seems much easier to just do > > (if (eq action 'metadata) > ;; Keep sorted by recency > - '(metadata (display-sort-function . identity)) > + `(metadata (display-sort-function . ,read-from-kill-ring-sort)) > (complete-with-action action completions string pred))) This is an incomplete patch, there should be also a dozen of lines with defcustom, its docstring, the version number and a list of choices, etc. And all this for a very small percent of users who would like to change this order. This is too wasteful. It would be much more efficient to allow doing the same by customizing completion-category-overrides.