[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete
From: |
João Távora |
Subject: |
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete |
Date: |
Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:27:48 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Ergus <address@hidden> writes:
> Thanks for the answer it is very clarifying for me now. Maybe you should
> add all this information somewhere in the documentation.
*all* this informatino is a bit much, don't you think, but there is
already documentation.
> I actually have very strong feelings behind ido in 2019 (I know I am a
> sort of apostate for this). But I think it is something that needs to be
> removed/deprecated/substituted for the good of newer alternatives like
The idea of fido-mode is indeed to obsolete ido mode. But it's still a
bit far away. And removing is yet another matter: i don't think there's
any harm in having ido. Of course, if fido-mode ever becomes a perfect
superset of ido, and removing it proves mostly harmless, OK I guess.
> The intention is to move the users to the newer functionalities so they
> can get the best possible first impression.
I agree with this. But I don't agree with the "newer" = "best
possible". These things take time to settle and one of the strong
points of Emacs is, paradoxically, its resistance to change. Its like a
movie theater where there are only classics playing. Lots of grainy
footage but all movies are superb.
> I think Abo-abo actually tried to modify ido to improve it and he
> finally ended implementing ivy... was easier that way.
And I found icomplete.el, which is already in Emacs.
> I will pray you to do the same for ivy... please please...
Well, I did very little. The author did all the work. I and Stefan
helped (mostly Stefan in the last part). The evolution is registered
here https://github.com/emacs-helm/helm/issues/2165.
You can point Ivy's author to this thread.
> think ivy is now much better integrated than helm before, but for sure
> there will be things missing you could help to improve.
>>still annoyingly (and legitimately) there, and we can't just change
>>icomplete-mode's defaults like that.
>>
> I have never used icomplete... so I don't know what ido provides that
> icomplete can't. So where is the gap? Is a part of the gap fixed in helm
> or ivy for example?
You are miscommunicating: the "gap" is whatever doesn't quite work in
icomplete-mode to make it work just like ido-mode. It's the behaviour
of RET, C-k, C-d and some other things.
> Maybe this paragraph should go in the manual in the ido section
> suggesting to switch to fido in order to improve fido as much as
> possible and deprecate the actual ido implementation in the future... (I
> have a dream, please don't burn me for this "A man can dream... a man
> can dream")
There's already a paragraph in the manual.
An alternative to Icomplete mode is Fido mode. This is very similar
to Icomplete mode, but retains some functionality from a popular
extension called Ido mode (in fact the name is derived from “Fake Ido”).
Among other things, in Fido mode, ‘C-s’ and ‘C-r’ are also used to
rotate the completions list, ‘C-k’ can be used to delete files and kill
buffers in-list. Another noteworthy aspect is that ‘flex’ is used as
the default completion style (*note Completion Styles::).
‘
To enable Fido mode, type ‘M-x fido-mode’, or customize the variable
fido-mode’ to ‘t’ (*note Easy Customization::).
I also put something in NEWS.
You (or anyone else) can propose changes it, if you want. I put it in
the icomplete section because it's really very closely related to
icomplete-mode. Maybe I could add a reference to the ido-mode manual
(just discovered it exists).
Don't know how to do inter-manual references, though, this one is
emacs/buffers.texi the other is misc/ido.texi.
João
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, (continued)
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Ergus, 2019/11/06
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Óscar Fuentes, 2019/11/06
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Ergus, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Óscar Fuentes, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Stefan Monnier, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Óscar Fuentes, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Stefan Monnier, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Óscar Fuentes, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Stefan Monnier, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, João Távora, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete,
João Távora <=
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Ergus, 2019/11/06
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, João Távora, 2019/11/07
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Ergus, 2019/11/07
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Filipp Gunbin, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Óscar Fuentes, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Nicolas Semrau, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Juanma Barranquero, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, João Távora, 2019/11/08
- Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete, Ergus, 2019/11/08
- Prev by Date:
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete
- Next by Date:
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete
- Previous by thread:
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete
- Next by thread:
Re: Why fido, icycles, ido, icomplete
- Index(es):