From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs completion matches selection UI Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:38:12 +0900 Message-ID: <87a9gxf12z.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87fvqtg02v.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <877gc5fm30.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87k3g47m7b.fsf@yandex.ru> <528B6F11.7070607@yandex.ru> <83mwl0fjgy.fsf@gnu.org> <528DDDAD.6080304@yandex.ru> <83fvqpemzv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385098723 28290 80.91.229.3 (22 Nov 2013 05:38:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 05:38:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Dmitry Gutov To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 22 06:38:46 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjS1-0003at-EK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 06:38:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36786 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjS0-0008KI-MG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:38:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59699) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjRr-0008K7-Lq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:38:42 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjRk-00084d-Bw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:38:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:49310) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VjjRc-000821-Bc; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:38:20 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19DB2970A20; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:38:13 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0E0031A5193; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:38:13 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <83fvqpemzv.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 182d01410b8d XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165531 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > > Or maybe "just" use a new, chromeless frame. > > XEmacs did that many years ago (Stephen can tell if it still does). It still does that. > I didn't like it then: a new frame forces you to switch focus to > it, at least with some window managers. Never heard of that. However, our frame management code is rather different from Emacs's. Maybe somebody found a way to avoid that (or maybe XEmacs users don't use those window managers). > A popup frame also obscures the window you are working in, which is > also a nuisance. Yeah, we've never fixed that. Of course the developer can position the popup by hand, but that sucks, too. But for something the size of a toolip (typically with relatively small font size, too) and no frame decorations, it doesn't bug me anywhere as much, YMMV. If you've got transparency working, maybe that would be worth trying (transparent background, alpha=.5 foreground?) Modern browsers also often fadeout the popup gradually (I think that's an admission that the design -- using a popup -- is fundamentally broken, but again YMMV).