From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Dimech Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#65348: RE: [External] : bug#65348: INITIAL-INPUT in completing-read repeats same entry twice consecutively Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:29:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <7D2p2XmGzWwhYjrI_PaUsn8r_NaQf-B0eAf7AmeRIhBEl84z79j_jKky-Lqlt6nc52SQ7T5yrL9OdqUzou1Mh3zQzgJx-SV6kIvc9Km8bDg=@protonmail.com> <83a5un35h6.fsf@gnu.org> <83o7j2yh47.fsf@gnu.org> <571_jSaUteaY0xDvqYdtM-FS0QLvAyOLY94AUDK81h4Fdn0jF869iyYXLHgsEmj1cEMNt6QHJnfCKY-__59S3R8z4SG03sXu9rO6mQa8nwg=@protonmail.com> <87sf8es0m0.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17836"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Michael Heerdegen , "eliz@gnu.org" , "heimeborgia@protonmail.com" , "65348@debbugs.gnu.org" <65348@debbugs.gnu.org> To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 21 08:31:26 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-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 1qXyRi-0004Uu-BV for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:31:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qXyRM-0007BW-2D; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:31:04 -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 1qXyRI-0007BK-8U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:31:00 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qXyRH-0000MY-W6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:31:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qXyRJ-00087K-Ov for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:31:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Christopher Dimech Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 06:31:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 65348 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 65348-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B65348.169259941131118 (code B ref 65348); Mon, 21 Aug 2023 06:31:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 65348) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Aug 2023 06:30:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55260 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qXyQU-00085q-97 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:30:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:39803) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qXyQR-000843-2E for 65348@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 02:30:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.com; s=s31663417; t=1692599393; x=1693204193; i=dimech@gmx.com; bh=y0wv5BT7M44fLN6n596hVeJnBXQJkkAzrpBgUhOtwug=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=PNY1KCaUVuGQu9heaP9kYz9GpvgGLW2+MVzpUIdF70K2DeLKsAu87pAxGMGG6hn9Tf0XLVt 7bSfvhqEB8CfHaAZaKUbgHeL8rImAZ68QooP4dHCU8L9/r23ASXAC5gXXXEmnZWgUM/EYQMSA F0RksPHfejCeddo98Owj9si+CXmANrH3cjHTNLj4MUwLgTQ0fvygiEJ0j/9TpdL9ijAKyalp9 XTNfqZd+/cF+ezsviF2OMWafKvekhfBF0VaJn47TOG8Zt1kTfT8NaQ9/0Khlw7pO26rkm+bz6 WBxtHwga0Htx/vEqH/W/9oa3DC+zh8b+TiKE3h3xsbGZhXiTOsSQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Original-Received: from [141.8.81.247] ([141.8.81.247]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-mailcom-bs13.server.lan [172.19.170.181]) (via HTTP); Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:29:52 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:ULBumPxb9+KeOLHkHVyTUxsIBUM/uDYVBcvDzT45huJIgP81attsGAs8xrg5t0qJO6PZn j7TvRFfkwkBg0qKnZztXivOguO66OzyXxGSWu3D68Engu3hscePP23Ns9bc2QohgO9tRZ4MP6vmU Bsp/vqRfHLynA5wfMgebJ9QzCu6HT8nywrjuaXOt6uGfKjn1wH30R51hEZRdJjsgTb990wCECIxm ygJbLa9nMfaHYs+IR6Py0Pv3dpoOeRreu9z62uVcQVuBsafY95Bgeymr2mMxJi2ID0EoacDmLxWh PE= UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:mX41Sq1Wwdc=;7UcH2xk2q6EQJe4LbBdbn7Axj/J FgFdWNxe6NwTFuYtW7TKa1u10Wm5hCO4QyQuhqylIBIaahasY/VBWtKXV2i1qEOYjJejMxoY6 AP9BH84ZuenIjk5pMUq5SwCnEQCM3HF9yD7TSj1y/v7p2mVbIXTVMPXSuv1XEVIov3f1tPc9y M2KCFKln/KhfCwBxl6Fhxhwz8oJjSKvlrBmVOrUYZsNBg4SVYCmmKcNssZVP9J4NZfzD8oeQP mmuHphr9EkilKMMgwhtzC9OGLOq62keNtoujy+7ZQmg3QDkHGze9a2QBTeBqKNZsoRc/gEpKn UAggfuqJ2UlC2zSO8Bp9ZDNMx4PC6AfLRbuQ9H319odyg5jQJmpSebpcjW8vEDErl2UXAaRxt jfYLlAdVrsNOkoXf0f/rI/xYMycmE5c5TgEV47ozpGuXH+wXOukKZ3BHIwcsWPF2bzFP7IkBi QB78MyW3d7t1xF8RCa31oISJ9oYPBiCEOjudFkLkJaVHxRsJAWRxQEH+lVZ0j96kX83rC5jfO JiR2fiLqDyaHu8dtKCdRiTnNlmmuXUhzOoXihqRTB9M0lRpOoKqhLoi/icalPVZqJFCgEz959 H8bCnAKgrsGDwRh3pNqX0hETPZU6Ww8FP+RGR+U7lha9Ao2GelDJWPVHAKbA9yClD/f2s+hpe MsOjJn23LwzN54i/Bc1qNZEYvQFmGG4KInFalgIxKLOp91R4LZ0Al7eGQ5NnG47P+5hvC6AwX uP2xUuPiklA6F+pbK6mixRmvNpShuSrER3OA4iGzrsKpqdtq2X99RQG5i+ZdFdA3bmmiAU5+ X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:268059 Archived-At: > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 at 5:23 PM > From: "Drew Adams" > To: "Christopher Dimech" > Cc: "Michael Heerdegen" , "eliz@gnu.org" , "heimeborgia@protonmail.com" , "653= 48@debbugs.gnu.org" <65348@debbugs.gnu.org> > Subject: bug#65348: RE: [External] : bug#65348: INITIAL-INPUT in complet= ing-read repeats same entry twice consecutively > > > > > I suggest that the capability of prefilling the minibuffer be > > > > reintroduced for the new scheme as well. Because from what > > > > I see, the deprecated parts include a feature that will be > > > > automatically discarded under the new scheme. > > > > > > I missed that memo completely! What's the new scheme? > > > > The new scheme of using history which automatically discarded > > the capability of prefilling the minibuffer before cycling can > > start. > > I don't understand. There's a proposal to NOT > SUPPORT INITIAL at all anymore? I definitely > oppose that. What is hoped to be _gained_, by > taking away this feature? It all depends whether INITIAL-INPUT would be deprecated. > > > What is expected to be automatically discarded? Where > > > is the presentation/discussion of such a change? Is > > > it this bug thread? (Why would it be in a bug thread?) > > > > As INITIAL is obsolete, the capability of prefilling the > > minibuffer entry would be missing. > > That's ridiculous. Why would anyone want to remove > that feature? Have we gone from (1) some deciding > that INITIAL isn't as good as DEFAULT (even though > they have different behaviors and thus different > uses) to (2) some deciding that INITIAL shouldn't > be supported at all? > > Was there some problem discovered with allowing > users to use INITIAL if/when they really want to? > I don't think so. This really has to be cleared out. > > > I hope we're not changing the longstanding arg list of > > > `completing-read' (except perhaps to add more args, > > > which might be debatable but excusable). > > > > It is a problem. We have been very happy adding more args for > > new features, without taking serious consideration the resulting > > confusion between old schemes and new schemes, resulting in numerous > > recommendations. The less recommendations on how to use a function > > the better things will be to work with. > > Sorry to say it, but that's just nonsense. If > Someone (TM) finds it too complicated to deal > with complex recommendations then don't recommend > anything about INITIAL or whatever. I agree > That's not a > reason to remove it - just because some people > might not ever use it. If your guidance seems to > be ending up to complicated then maybe it's a bit > misguided. Maybe start over and don't advise so > much. WHAT the CODE does is what matters, and > that's clear - clearer than any supposedly derived > description of what you should use when. The changes to completing-read needs clarification. > `completing-read' _is_ complex, and it _does_ have > many different use patterns. Should we remove > some of the different values we allow for argument > COMPLETIONS, because that would make describing > the function easier or simpler to understand? > > That way lies madness. If Someone wants a > simplified, dumbed-down `completing-read' then > they can create another function that does what > they want. But leave the original alone. There's > no need to go deprecating and removing features > that others put to what they consider to be good > use. I agree. > I don't know who's requesting such changes, > misguidedly thinking they're improving things, > so I write "Someone". I mean "they", whoever > they might be. > > > When deep changes happen, I prefer to keep the old as is, > > and make a new function for significant changes that affect > > the old functionality. > > Make a new function that _doesn't_ affect the > old functionality. That's the point. If > Someone wants a new/different behavior then > they can code it up and give it a name - a > new name. It shouldn't affect good old > `completing-read' at all. Absolutely right. > > It does not happen regularly that new features are accessed in ways th= at > > maintain clarity and avoids unnecessary complexity. > > And? Not sure I follow your point there. Serious focus on clarity is needed, rather than simply go on with changes. > > > Let's please keep this function backward-compatible. > > > If you want something different, please add it as a > > > separate function. > > > > That's the whole point, and we should follow that route > > as an important strategy for maintainers. > > I think maybe you're agreeing with me, or I with > you? I am agreeing. > Regardless of who's pushing it, if Someone wants > to get rid of INITIAL then I object. I objected > when the doc was changed to say it's ill-advised > etc. I concur with your objection. > I don't have a problem with calling out the > special case that's mentioned wrt placement of > point. I do object to the doc saying that that's > the ONLY case where anyone should ever use INITIAL. > > Let's please stop with the "shoulds" altogether, > unless they're backed up with clear reasons. > Otherwise that's just "I don't like" whatever - > beards or piano or watermelon or... > > And there never was any need/reason for such a > restriction/admonishment against INITIAL. It's > just overeager-beaver control syndrome, IMO. > There was never anything to warn users away from > or protect them from. Using INITIAL won't get > anyone in trouble. Whether it's the best tool > for the job depends on what the job is and what > your taste is. Using INITIAL does not cause problems. Contrarily it provides a clear way to prefill the minibuffer. Avoiding things like so (minibuffer-with-setup-hook (lambda () (insert "BBB")) (completing-read "Input: " (list "AAA" "BBB" "CCC"))) > Whether Someone thinks that stylistically it's > always bad to use INITIAL is, IMO, irrelevant. > Someone is just plain wrong. The devil, when it > comes to what's useful in any given case, is in > the details of the context of calling > `completing-read', and in the users of that code. > > Someone should be a little less presumptuous, and > just let it be. Circulez - il n'y a rien a voir! >