Re: Icicles [was: shell command completion gone]

[Darth Emacs <darthemacs@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4809 bytes --]

Hi Drew,

By any chance could I talk you into posting your Icicles bindings. I would
enjoy getting a feel of how you think Icicles works best.

Best regards,
Darth Emacs

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote:

> > > By default, `up' and `down' (arrows) in Icicles do not
> > > cycle history entries.  They cycle completion candidates...
> >
> > Yes I know
> >
> > > To cycle history entries use `M-n' and `M-p' (or change the
> > > keys to suit yourself).  This is all in the doc.
> >
> > Yes. I was just pointing out that that is not vanilla emacs -- your
> > earlier point was that simply using icy-mode without customizations
> > gives you vanilla behavior.
>
> I did not say that.  I said that if you use the usual keys in the
> minibuffer
> then "you should hardly notice being in Icicle mode."  To which I took the
> trouble to point out that "`hardly' is not `never'", which is a caveat
> recognizing that there are some differences.
>
> `M-n' and `M-p' are standard keys for cycling history in vanilla Emacs.
>  They
> are the original keys for this, the most commonly documented keys for it,
> and
> they work on nearly every keyboard.  In Icicles too they cycle the input
> history.
>
> It is true that vanilla Emacs also assigns `down' and `up' for cycling
> history,
> and Icicles assigns these keys, by default, to cycling candidates.
>
> This is all documented.  I wrote a fairly lengthy mail, but if you want a
> more
> exact description then consult the doc.  It doesn't help anyone to repeat
> such
> details here, IMO.
>
> But you say you already knew this about history cycling.  So perhaps your
> point
> was that I am misrepresenting things.
>
> I think my representation was a fair and accurate general statement about a
> typical user: if you stick to the usual keys in the minibuffer then you
> will
> hardly notice being in Icicle mode.  You are free to disagree.
>
> > I see that the behavior is different than the last I saw.  The icicles
> > completion buffer is still around
>
> The buffer has always been kept around.  The *Completions* window is
> deleted,
> that's all; the buffer is not killed.  (Vanilla Emacs does not even remove
> the
> window.)
>
> My uninformed guess is that you have upgraded to a more recent Emacs
> version and
> its choice of the buffer that is displayed when you kill a buffer has
> changed,
> so that now you are more often seeing *Completions* displayed in the place
> of
> some buffer that you have killed.
>
> It is not Icicles that displays *Completions* then - Icicles is not
> "bringing it
> up".  *Completions* is just one existing buffer among others, and for some
> reason Emacs now decides that it is the one it wants to display for you in
> the
> window of a buffer that you killed.
>
> It's possible that *Completions* should be buried when its window is
> deleted, to
> reduce the possibility that it will be substituted for a killed buffer.
>  Please
> send a step-by-step bug report starting with emacs -Q, including your Emacs
> version.
>
> (I use a standalone *Completions* frame myself, so I don't see this
> problem.
> And it has not been otherwise reported.)
>
> > and still useless (bringing it up and clicking something
> > in it gives me minibuffer is not active for completion)
>
> Of course.  There is no reason to click in it.  Icicles is not "bringing it
> up".
> It is just being shown in place of a buffer that you killed (IIUC).  What
> you
> want is for some other buffer to do that, not *Completions*.  Send an exact
> recipe and I'll take a look - sounds like a call to `bury-buffer' might be
> needed.
>
> > but it seems to be 'buried' deeper than earlier so it does
> > not get so much in the way.
>
> Now I'm confused.  I thought you were describing a regression in behavior
> but
> now it sounds like the behavior has actually improved.  Anyway, send me a
> recipe
> to reproduce what annoys you and I'll take a look.
>
> > [Interestingly if I make the minibuffer active say with a M-x and then
> > click one of the (earlier) completion entries I get args out of range]
>
> The old content of the *Completions* buffer is of course useless (except
> for
> reference, to see what the candidates were for your last use), as you
> pointed
> out.  You should not expect behavior different from what you describe in
> this
> regard.  On the other hand, if you hit TAB after M-x then *Completions*
> should
> be correctly updated to show the current candidates.
>
> HTH.
>
>
>


-- 
* Darth Emacs *

“Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds
the universe together. <http://thinkexist.com/quotes/oprah_winfrey/>”

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5619 bytes --]