From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: code completion Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:06:17 +0000 Message-ID: <878x0o87uu.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <878x0omhmw.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205323664 7883 80.91.229.12 (12 Mar 2008 12:07:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Richard G Riley , help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Richard G Riley Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 12 13:08:09 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JZPkG-0005mK-Vp for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:07:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZPji-0003uD-D5 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:07:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZPjQ-0003tO-FF for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:06:52 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZPjP-0003st-9m for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:06:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZPjP-0003sq-52 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:06:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.191]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZPjO-0005fT-NT for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:06:50 -0400 Original-Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g7so3436837muf.0 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:06:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; bh=swVNqiWTJ8FqXmpp2BuZmT6qXt4PQj3rZ3ZktBZTrXQ=; b=scRsLCZbJ4b80h4D2UaVQIvHoXiA+8s1GoIWwOOfhCHA5d74szvl7H3xk6PJKQiciXItHdF8psovspHHmwBNB067M2RINilQBH23Q3JT5AOPhlmpnVKGsh/NCUqwHQmxqLCzlfa1STgwd9SBepjXJNHhr9bopgIV8AmDjQBoq98= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; b=MiGUfYQxqVkBYAxuOAs2TxxCz2ifW4n6NI73bwVFUnGlxVcyMPYi8vY1BlR50jnC8yrKHHtRvkPEjngOc4Syxl3HTRewHtgIgBnc9zdhHme0CVS4kPqG05UXSnlcDejVdmoBP+dIC5GMITSzAVa11fPyjWJCJIEGWCi+ihSKbDQ= Original-Received: by 10.78.161.4 with SMTP id j4mr21417497hue.63.1205323608883; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:06:48 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from bzg.ath.cx ( [81.99.213.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y37sm6023841iky.7.2008.03.12.05.06.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by bzg.ath.cx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5D996157971; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:06:17 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: (Richard G. Riley's message of "Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:17:11 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:52285 Archived-At: Richard G Riley writes: > However, it would be wrong to say all is flowers and sunshine. It is not > and an honest answer (from my perspective) is more respectful at times. If someone requests improvements for a feature in Emacs (e.g. code refactoring) it is honest to tell about the shortcomings of its current implementation. It is depressing to recommand the OP to have a look at other editors, not because it is dishonest, but because such an advice won't help make the Emacs implementation better. And the more constructive way is to give directions on how to help improving the feature. Imagine this: you create a new tool (say bzr) that aims at being better than others (say CVS, RCS) wrt some features. When you start coding the tool, it is still behind the other ones. Now imagine that someone likes your tool and asks about a feature. What if someone else recommends the OP to switch to another tool, just because your tool (the one he uses) doesn't have this feature ? I guess you woudn't find this constructive... -- Bastien