From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Schmidt Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: completion.el users? Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 23:05:35 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <87d2sxuq6v@ch.ristopher.com> References: <87vc6p8sdi@ch.ristopher.com> <87li7lo4p8.fsf@yandex.ru> <0BA3DA32EEC343739CFE4229CA94FD5B@us.oracle.com> <87txm9uxmp@ch.ristopher.com> <943243026FFC4D699528918175E0ABDC@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1368309953 14247 80.91.229.3 (11 May 2013 22:05:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 22:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Drew Adams To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 12 00:05:52 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 1UbHvK-00028h-UW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 May 2013 00:05:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51622 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbHvK-00024q-Ez for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 May 2013 18:05:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44750) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbHvE-00024i-8F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2013 18:05:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbHv7-0007zl-K7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2013 18:05:44 -0400 Original-Received: from ristopher.com ([146.185.21.93]:46894 helo=saturn.ch.ristopher.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbHv7-0007zZ-CJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2013 18:05:37 -0400 Original-Received: by saturn.ch.ristopher.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 27A2E201A3; Sat, 11 May 2013 23:05:35 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ch.ristopher.com; s=mail; t=1368309935; bh=AoaIv/DnKCBfuv5AipdwSfjbseGEkfZxg/psXGyAF+g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date; b=obFulQfR78p2aPfsxfxEARNPgOxWRWKBii9Y/7+USqRbxuY8G0Iek913d2+8XfUP5 47sE0foIUeLxz/O8NffjNN0HLjxSI7IjY4Ia10VP+d5TorsiDvS8vMIRelsp3c/h+f jRSOuTUaUqUe4zwvBUD4igurMu1VwG+XrJAhd+0M= In-Reply-To: <943243026FFC4D699528918175E0ABDC@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Sat, 11 May 2013 14:16:05 -0700") Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Drew Adams X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x X-Received-From: 146.185.21.93 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:159522 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: Hi Drew, thanks for your massive answer. I get your argumentation and all the points you raised. I do not exactly agree. > Or just because it supposedly is "not exactly used any more" - which > is not demonstrated. Just googling "dynamic-completion-mode" gives > 50K+ hits, some (other than this thread) as recent as 5 days ago. There are 80 hits. Try to go past page eight. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22dynamic-completion-mode%22 I went through the result - it does not indicate much usage of dynamic-completion-mode. > No, like your GIT search, that is admittedly _not_ a good indicator of > the use of completion.el. Why is that? Considering the massive amount of Emacs configurations hosted over at github, the ratio of occurrences of auto-complete-mode vs. dynamic-completion-mode is pretty representative. > What is the real impetus for wanting to deprecate completion.el now? Who is responsible for the code? Who steps up to fix bugs? Who is willing to document the feature?[1] No one is. Considering the state of GNU Emacs development, most likely no one ever will. Why promote usage of dynamic-completion-mode although there are other free packages such as auto-complete-mode or predictive-mode[2] which are superior to dynamic-completion-mode? > That the "last non-cosmetic patch for it was made in 2007" is not a > strike against it, IMHO. Not at all. And all the less so if that is > reinforced with the "argument" that that "seems surprisingly long for > a 90KB file." > > Completion.el has been in use for a long time. Ultimately people moved on to other packages. Why should the dev team keep the cruft? How about moving the code to a special GNU ELPA branch - the GNU ELPAM (Emacs Lisp Package Archaeological Museum)? Move it back to the GNU ELPA if someone steps up to maintain it... Christopher [1] dynamic-completion-mode is not mentioned in the manual. The wiki does not mention it either. This makes it an implementation detail of GNU Emacs to me. [2] http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/PredictiveMode