Re: feature request: indicator of minibuffer-recursion depth

[Kim F. Storm]

"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:

>     2) use propertized "[%d]" as depth>1 marker
>
> a. I prefer unpropertized (certainly not `highlight'). There is no need to
> make this so prominent. It's been missing altogether for decades with no
> disastrous consequences.

But even if you have enabled recursive minibuffers, it happens so rarely
in practice, that I think it makes good sense to bring attention
to the fact that this is indeed a recursive invocation.  Some things
works quite differently when activated in this state.

It sounds like a 

    (defcustom minibuffer-depth-indicator "%d) " 
     ...)

would be the best solution  -- then anyone can change it to their
own liking.their own

>
> b. I prefer "%d) ":
>
>  Find file:
>  2) Match also (regexp):
>  3) Match also (regexp):
>
> instead of "[%d]":
>
>  Find file:
>  [2]Match also (regexp):
>  [3]Match also (regexp):
>

> There's no need to enclose the level in brackets (or parens or braces).

I prefer [n] because it is analogue to the way we indicate recursive edit in 
the mode line.

> There is nothing to its left to separate it from. There is a need, howeve,
> to separate it from the prompt. At least a space is needed.

Not if you propertize the string, IMHO.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk