From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: completing-read depricated initial-input Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:19:14 +0200 Message-ID: <87zgi2tqwt.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <86r13hubaw.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <86letphfke.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <86mte3lsj2.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <871qvfoce1.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32544"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:TKaV2rt0XNHSvexH2CmgnjLg/fU= Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 24 10:26:03 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1o4edf-0008Gv-9R for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:26:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33130 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4edd-000368-8h for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:26:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37728) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4eXU-00052s-7e for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:19:40 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:40734) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4eXE-00041g-Qq for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 04:19:39 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1o4eXD-0009n2-2w for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 10:19:23 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:138066 Archived-At: Jean Louis wrote: > (read-from-minibuffer "Your name: " nil nil nil nil "Jean") Holy cow, there's no need to hard code that! What if you were to change your name (nom de guerre if you wish) for romantic and/or conspiratorial reasons? Use `user-full-name' instead ... (BTW 4 nil in a row. How many do you need to strike the jackpot?) >> Inserting default would make sense. We should not continue >> with the initial-value name then. Stating that DEF will be >> displayed as first instance. Making things smoother and >> clearer to understand. > > I do not find it so. I do not say how function works, but > I wish to say what I expect as user. We have been thinking of it in very practical terms so far. I already asked, what concept is the initial value? I'm not aware of any such concept in this context. One can think of several UIs (including GUIs) where the initial value has been inserted to communicate the default value, and enable - transparently, even - for the user to submit this value. In that sense, it isn't that bad: the default value is shown loud and clear, it can be edited and when its submitted this happens with the same method so no extras in terms of technology at that end. However ... We don't want that for the default value so all that doesn't matter anymore (or to us). If we look at it from even further away the initial value makes even less sense. "Why is the computer putting stuff there? It's the area where the human user should put stuff." So in general it doesn't make sense, specifically it _could_ make sense but it doesn't since we have another, better method for that. There is only one use case (completion with a common prefix) however that can either be automated _or_ solved with the default method _and_ relying on completion to navigate huge search spaces of similar members, that's a poor situation to begin with, maybe it gets mildly better with completion but that's obviously nothing to base general policy on. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal