From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Semyonov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:56:49 +0200 Message-ID: <87czlphsim.fsf@dsemy.com> References: <87pmpurtl9.fsf@posteo.net> <86fsqpsspn.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87fsqomyog.fsf@posteo.net> <86fsqoh7w5.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87mtkwkuzj.fsf@posteo.net> <86y24d7pdz.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87v8zh63uy.fsf@posteo.net> <87ilvhhy63.fsf@dsemy.com> <86sfulgge3.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="37555"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Philip Kaludercic , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 22 10:58:26 2021 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 1mzyOA-0009YJ-Rj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 10:58:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56668 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyO9-0003Oj-LC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 04:58:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52404) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyMp-0002UI-Ca for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 04:57:03 -0500 Original-Received: from dsemy.com ([46.23.89.208]:46231) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyMl-0003QY-LQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 04:57:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=dkim; bh=8mwMjhUwMEWsw KlIFQK99MkeV4R81ZhG9970C4Ynqp8=; h=in-reply-to:date:references: subject:cc:to:from; d=dsemy.com; b=DTJzD5RHGTt0x4OoWlPqR5Kv1/+X2Z87vl/ sgOJkC6hStlcKG/GexiPAo06Ja6BHo6KWQCyv+p+YRGmSEdaXPTzWYs9VxXm4q/ov4TTlx Rp6sz1/WkCRbThppRKWiDxqpjJyffVhT/sNfFTidQFw6HJPf0i1s/ThBcoUeQIfgpzIYi0 noHGGybQPAUXZo1bOFAJdSLPoAUgLrcQJGV1H7v6hOr77ZIy+n9CQ405hpecjhOyjMgRay xNej7WT6LU8pdTr4n21nLveR+JNHYHuiGmpKA/wkvKS+ObNKByQY4qwiYoOnn4UCEc5SNA s1zNDezX5w2U/bx19+IGmIx+SzA== Original-Received: from coldharbour (bzq-79-177-205-127.red.bezeqint.net [79.177.205.127]) by dsemy.com (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id a466df12 (TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO); Wed, 22 Dec 2021 10:56:50 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <86sfulgge3.fsf@mail.linkov.net> (Juri Linkov's message of "Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:04:04 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=46.23.89.208; envelope-from=daniel@dsemy.com; helo=dsemy.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:282699 Archived-At: >>>>> Juri Linkov writes: >> I like these improvements overall, but I think >> 'completion-auto-select' should be split into two options (or >> allow more specific assignment) to differentiate between >> automatically selecting the *Completions* buffer when it appears >> and selecting it as part of "wrapping" (when >> 'completion-wrap-movement' is enabled). The former behavior is >> very jarring when using a package which automatically updates the >> *Completions* buffer (for example, ELPA package >> aggressive-completion), while the latter behavior could still be >> desired in such cases. > Sorry, I don't understand what is the latter behavior that is > selecting the *Completions* buffer as part of "wrapping". What > wrapping could select it? When just 'completion-wrap-movement' is enabled and the last completion has been reached (in the *Completions* buffer), pressing TAB will jump to the first completion. When both 'completion-wrap-movement' and 'completion-auto-select' are enabled, instead of jumping to the first completion, pressing TAB will select the minibuffer. Pressing TAB again will then select the *Completions* buffer and jump to the first completion. This the 'latter' behavior, which I would like to have independently of enabling 'completion-auto-select'. > What keys should be typed to initiate such wrapping? TAB and , same as currently. Thanks, Daniel