[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:
From: |
Mike Mattie |
Subject: |
Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-: |
Date: |
Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:07:12 -0700 |
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:52:51 -0400
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> But I think I stated that enough now, and you clearly stated your
> >> position as well, so it could help to have other people advice on
> >> that concerning the *current implementation* of M-:
>
> For what it's worth, I'm a bit annoyed by Emacs's inconsistent use of
> TAB: in minibuffers, TAB behaves like in terminals to mean "complete",
> where in normal buffers it usually means "indent".
>
> But of course, "indent" can also make sense in minibuffers, and
> "complete" also makes a lot of sense in normal buffers.
>
> I have used for many years commands that do both bound to TAB:
> typically my TAB first tries to indent, and if the indentation code
> didn't make any change then TAB tries to complete.
>
> It works OK as far as DWIMish things are concerned, but it has some
> rough corners:
> - if the indentation code always makes changes (e.g. because it cycles
> through several possible indentation points), then completion is
> never used.
Can you post the code ? I have a similar setup, but I can't remember
running into that particular problem before.
The biggest issue I noticed with overloaded commands is that Emacs
commands will inspect this-command. An overloaded command
needs to adjust these sorts of variables so other code isn't adversely
affected. Some parts of Emacs definitely don't appreciate the current
command being a lambda either.
> - if the completion code only gets called when you repeat TAB, then
> well... you have to repeat TAB to get to completion.
> - if not, then you get surprising results when you do TAB C-n TAB C-n
> ... intending to reindent a chunk of code and once of the lines
> happens to be properly indented already and you end up
> completing instead.
>
> So it's not a satisfactory solution.
I definitely have a different implementation that sounds more robust.
I hit tab repeatedly and the result is always the same in regards to
the behavior selected.
>
> Stefan
>
>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- RE: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, (continued)
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/16
- RE: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Drew Adams, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Bastien, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, David De La Harpe Golden, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Stefan Monnier, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:,
Mike Mattie <=
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Stefan Monnier, 2008/03/17
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/17
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Richard Stallman, 2008/03/17
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/18
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Richard Stallman, 2008/03/18
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Stefan Monnier, 2008/03/19
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/19
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Andreas Schwab, 2008/03/19
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, paul r, 2008/03/16
- Re: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2008/03/16