From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eshel Yaron Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: package-autosuggest Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 09:01:28 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83ttskia84.fsf@gnu.org> <97c96b72-ebba-4853-98d2-86e3ba8bbc05@app.fastmail.com> <83sf84i9ix.fsf@gnu.org> <837cpfhzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <83zg2agjp8.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttshk3ns.fsf@posteo.net> <83il8whjig.fsf@gnu.org> <87fs40oiie.fsf@posteo.net> <838r9shgtz.fsf@gnu.org> <871qfkogy7.fsf@posteo.net> <835y4whd0m.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0nks55d.fsf_-_@posteo.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="35872"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Stefan Monnier , Philip Kaludercic , Eli Zaretskii , yandros@gmail.com, bozhidar@batsov.dev, dmitry@gutov.dev, rms@gnu.org, danny@dfreeman.email, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 01 09:02:31 2023 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 1qbyAp-000972-6N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 09:02:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbyA5-0005Ve-Mo; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 03:01:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qby9w-0005Ss-Pm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 03:01:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.eshelyaron.com ([107.175.124.16] helo=eshelyaron.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qby9u-0002IO-LF; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 03:01:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eshelyaron.com; s=mail; t=1693551693; bh=UZ+8j64jeRFkKBvoU4ys+ZnNs21qiVwDnGREGgRlzFg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=WUCFUM4M0LMafSJwRah30qSUfMeJjCHyEY5Ddcbv1CKpgJOv4VhGmKdNglzoQsugV 8M3xV6g12WotjmoPIC6Gr4/VwEQvYNvm17gHHeRaFj68F2WGCdZICnMcMwWJcP7On1 qwUWKhhAgcKT79FuKXC3yY803yh2XeFCYS3FGeK43imrQc90wS9sCbNaRCV9GKnSE9 p1Xie5rIe3n3BVEzqFRsa8rurHS96cGqNwF+AzadYPvNrqAZowOVfBo//KxHOInmTB TJTDpvKSowH/vWDAq3myQIAjPPdKnyJ3/JeveckPHa44hcs9M3vxLi8O07rr08k7XW AOKxjqdmsmKow== In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Thu, 31 Aug 2023 23:09:31 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=107.175.124.16; envelope-from=me@eshelyaron.com; helo=eshelyaron.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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309727 Archived-At: Hello Stefan, Stefan Kangas writes: > Eshel Yaron writes: > >> That'd indeed already be an improvement, my point is that in some cases >> we would know that it really is the right package with very high >> certainty. > > Shouldn't that just be the criterion, then? In other words, isn't > that what it would mean to only recommend things that are likely to be > helpful? I'm not sure. In Philip's draft, I don't think that this is the case. (Correct me if I've missed anything, please.) The way I see it there are two parameters to consider for each recommendation. Let's call them potential and confidence. Potential is how much value the user can obtain from Emacs's recommendation. That depends mostly on the recommended package itself. Confidence is how certain Emacs is that this user should use this package. For example, again, in the current draft we have a recommendation for `sml-mode` based on files with extension `.sml`. This recommendation has great potential to benefit Standard ML users (I assume, I haven't tried it out myself), but the confidence for this recommendation isn't that high, because it's prone to false positives (not all `.sml` files are Standard ML). The crux is that the quality of a recommendation depends not only on the quality of the package but also on the strength of the signal that leads Emacs to recommend it (the quality of the "hint"). Personally, I think that even with a chance of false positives, suggesting `sml-mode` to a user that opens `foo.sml` is great. For this reason, I proposed that Emacs should make both high-confidence and low-confidence recommendations, but use different messages for the two cases (or three, if you want to also have "medium-confidence"). Best, Eshel