From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10963: 24.0.94; `dabbrev-completion' and `completion-cycle-threshold' Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:21:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1331583737 32674 80.91.229.3 (12 Mar 2012 20:22:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 20:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10963@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dani Moncayo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 12 21:22:16 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1S7Bl2-0005Yx-6X for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:22:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40121 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bl1-00049T-I4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:22:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bky-00048n-3e for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:22:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bkw-0005GP-BD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:22:11 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:40487) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bkw-0005GL-80 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:22:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S7CDq-0004Gv-0r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:52:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 20:52:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10963 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10963-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10963.133158547716365 (code B ref 10963); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 20:52:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10963) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2012 20:51:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47319 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S7CD7-0004Fu-1E for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:51:17 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:48115) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S7CD4-0004Fm-NK for 10963@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:51:15 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q2CKLL9e021623; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BB002130D24; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:21:21 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:00:58 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4159=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4159> : streams <737232> : uri <1081849> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:57742 Archived-At: >> It mostly works, but there is one detail that seems to need a fix: >> Consider this scenario: >> 1. M-: (setq completion-cycle-threshold 4) RET >> 2. foo1 RET foo2 RET foo3 RET foo >> Now, repeated `C-M-/' commands cycle like this: >> foo3/foo1/foo2 >> but repeated `M-/' commands cycle like this: >> foo3/foo2/foo1 >> I think that the cycling order should be equal in both cases, and IMO >> the right order is the one followed by `M-/' (ISTR that I've read >> something about this in the manual, but right now I can't find the >> place). > That will require more changes: the current cycling order of C-M-/ is > completely different from the one of M-/ because the completion table > used is an obarray (a sort of hash-table), so dabbrev's ordering is > completely lost, and after that the completion code uses its default > sorting (which gives preference to shorter completions, which in this > case makes no difference). So we'll need to stop using an obarray, and > to pass an ad-hoc sorting function to the completion code. OK, I think it's fixed now, can you confirm? Stefan