From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Galen Boyer Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: eshell: Support old-style completion and cycling completion? Date: 16 Feb 2003 20:15:12 -0600 Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <84k7g0x9oz.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1045448378 29020 80.91.224.249 (17 Feb 2003 02:19:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 02:19:38 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18kasb-0007Xv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2003 03:19:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18katR-0001pD-01 for gnu-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 21:20:29 -0500 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!novia!newscene.com!newscene.com!newscene!novia!novia!sequencer.newscene.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 17 Original-Sender: galenboyer@hotpop.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:110257 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:6759 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:6759 On Sun, 16 Feb 2003, kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de wrote: > Hm. Thinking some more, it's possible that a behavior that I would > like is this: > > If there is a common prefix for all completions, insert that. If > there is more than one possible completion, beep. After the next > TAB, show all possible completions. After the next TAB, complete to > the first completion. So it's a kind of a hybrid between old-style > and cycling style. The tab following the first completion buffer scrolls that completion buffer. How should the user retain that functionality? -- Galen deForest Boyer Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.