[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer
From: |
Juri Linkov |
Subject: |
Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Dec 2021 19:40:30 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
> diff --git a/lisp/simple.el b/lisp/simple.el
> index a55df604c1..1521c325dc 100644
> --- a/lisp/simple.el
> +++ b/lisp/simple.el
> @@ -8967,7 +8967,8 @@ completion-quit
> (defun completion-kill-buffer ()
> "Close the completion buffer and return to the minibuffer."
> (interactive)
> - (kill-buffer "*Completions*")
> + (let ((win (get-buffer-window "*Completions*")))
> + (when win (quit-window t win)))
> (switch-to-minibuffer))
After fixing bug#52491, no more commands using switch-to-minibuffer
would be needed, so `q' can remain round to `quit-window', thus
doing what `delete-window' is customized to do.
>> Like currently `ESC ESC ESC' can close the completion window
>> by the special command `delete-completion-window', then the same
>> command could be bound to `[remap keyboard-quit]' as well.
>
> Sure, but what noticeable difference does this make? It seems to me
> that quitting or killing the completion buffer doesn't amount to much of
> a difference, as *Completion* is rarely selected manually.
>
> The only case I can think of where the difference could matter, is when
> *Completion* is so large that you need to kill it. But considering that
> even with "C-h o TAB" the difference appears to be indistinguishable.
> Quitting a window and requesting the came completion doesn't even reuse
> the existing buffer.
I see no difference, but maybe someone might want to use different commands
for quit-window: with and without kill-buffer (this will require a new command
`quit-window-kill-buffer').
> Seeing as <left> and <right> are bound to previous-completion and
> next-completion, maybe <up> and <down> could be used for
> completion/minibuffer switching?
Both pairs <left>/<right> and <up>/<down> are useful in multi-column
completions buffer.
> Or to take inspiration from Protesilaos's MCT package, that switches
> back to the minibuffer once next-completion and previous-completion
> reaches the end/beginning of the buffer, without quitting the window.
> With next-completion bound to TAB while TAB also jumps back to the
> completion buffer, it would behave to just by cycling.
This means no wrapping? Or maybe wrapping through the minibuffer?
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, (continued)
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Juri Linkov, 2021/12/19
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Philip Kaludercic, 2021/12/19
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Philip Kaludercic, 2021/12/20
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Juri Linkov, 2021/12/21
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Philip Kaludercic, 2021/12/21
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Daniel Semyonov, 2021/12/22
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Juri Linkov, 2021/12/22
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Daniel Semyonov, 2021/12/22
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Juri Linkov, 2021/12/22
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/12/22
- Re: Suggestions for improvements to the *Completions* buffer,
Juri Linkov <=