Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

[Arash Esbati]

Hi all,

Emacs 30.0.50 has this in text-mode.el (line 155; line break added for
better legibility):

  (when (eq text-mode-ispell-word-completion 'completion-at-point)
    (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
              #'ispell-completion-at-point 10 t))

With the latest AUCTeX, the new LaTeX-mode now derives from text-mode
and the value of `completion-at-point-functions' becomes this in a .tex
file:

  (TeX--completion-at-point t ispell-completion-at-point
                            LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point)

The problem is that `ispell-completion-at-point' kicks in also when
point is inside a macro argument and one actually expects key=val
completion for instance, so I want
`LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point' before
`ispell-completion-at-point' in that list.  AUCTeX requires Emacs 27
now, and I can fix this by changing this addition in latex.el from:

  (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
            #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point t t)

to something like:

  (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
            #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point 5 t)

Before making this change to 5 (which is an arbitrary choice): Is there
any kind of range convention where major/minor modes should put their
completion functions?  Any pointer is appreciated.

Best, Arash

Re: Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

[Eshel Yaron]

Hello Arash,

Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Emacs 30.0.50 has this in text-mode.el (line 155; line break added for
> better legibility):
>
>   (when (eq text-mode-ispell-word-completion 'completion-at-point)
>     (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
>               #'ispell-completion-at-point 10 t))
>
> With the latest AUCTeX, the new LaTeX-mode now derives from text-mode
> and the value of `completion-at-point-functions' becomes this in a .tex
> file:
>
>   (TeX--completion-at-point t ispell-completion-at-point
>                             LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point)
>
> The problem is that `ispell-completion-at-point' kicks in also when
> point is inside a macro argument and one actually expects key=val
> completion for instance, so I want
> `LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point' before
> `ispell-completion-at-point' in that list.  AUCTeX requires Emacs 27
> now, and I can fix this by changing this addition in latex.el from:
>
>   (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
>             #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point t t)
>
> to something like:
>
>   (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
>             #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point 5 t)
>
> Before making this change to 5 (which is an arbitrary choice): Is there
> any kind of range convention where major/minor modes should put their
> completion functions?  Any pointer is appreciated.

This isn't an authoritative answer, but I'm not aware of such a
convention.  IIRC I picked a DEPTH of 10 for that add-hook call mostly
because that's what text-mode, and prog-mode, were already using for
their context-menu-functions.  I think a value of 5 should be fine for
LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point (and 9 too, for that matter).


Best,

Eshel

Re: Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

[Juri Linkov]

>>   (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
>>             #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point t t)
>>
>> to something like:
>>
>>   (add-hook 'completion-at-point-functions
>>             #'LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point 5 t)
>>
>> Before making this change to 5 (which is an arbitrary choice): Is there
>> any kind of range convention where major/minor modes should put their
>> completion functions?  Any pointer is appreciated.
>
> This isn't an authoritative answer, but I'm not aware of such a
> convention.  IIRC I picked a DEPTH of 10 for that add-hook call mostly
> because that's what text-mode, and prog-mode, were already using for
> their context-menu-functions.  I think a value of 5 should be fine for
> LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point (and 9 too, for that matter).

The step 5 between numbers 5, 10, 15, ... or 10 for 10, 20, 30, ...
is like in BASIC that allows you inserting new elements in between
without renumbering the entire sequence.

Re: Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

[Arash Esbati]

Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> writes:

> The step 5 between numbers 5, 10, 15, ... or 10 for 10, 20, 30, ...
> is like in BASIC that allows you inserting new elements in between
> without renumbering the entire sequence.

Yes, this was exactly my reasoning for 5, which I eventually used.

Best, Arash

Re: Position of functions in `completion-at-point-functions'

[Arash Esbati]

Hi Eshel,

Eshel Yaron <me@eshelyaron.com> writes:

> This isn't an authoritative answer, but I'm not aware of such a
> convention.

Thanks for your response.

> IIRC I picked a DEPTH of 10 for that add-hook call mostly because
> that's what text-mode, and prog-mode, were already using for their
> context-menu-functions.

Ah, Ok, now I see, thanks for the clarification.

> I think a value of 5 should be fine for
> LaTeX--arguments-completion-at-point (and 9 too, for that matter).

At the end of the day, I took 5 and installed it.

Best, Arash