Re: [PATCH] Re: Other details about completion.

[Ergus]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 10:39:16AM +0300, Juri Linkov wrote:
> > > Do you mean addition step is needed where first C-g/ESC will clear
> > > the suffix, then another C-g/ESC will exit the minibuffer?
> >
> > We need a simple handy way to restore the mini-buffer as it was before
> > the navigation attempt...
> >
> > Maybe, let's look more at zsh and similes... That's already tested to
> > be intuitive so we don't need to reinvent the wheel and their users
> > already know.
>
> C-g in the completions buffer closes the completions window,
> then the second C-g in the minibuffer exits the minibuffer.
>
> So C-g in the minibuffer could be two-step as well:
> first C-g closes the completions window and clears the suffix,
> second C-g exits the minibuffer.
The most I go into this the most convinced I get that
completion-auto-select and selecting the Completions windows is the
simplest and cleaner way to go.

> > > > 2) In tabular navigation the down arrow always goes to the first column
> > > > which is wrong; maybe it should use next-line or line-move instead of
> > > > forward-line?
> > >
> > > This is what I tried first, but byte-compiler complained next-line
> > > is only for interactive use.
> >
> > Then it should probably be line-move but forward-line goes to column zero.
>
> Neither of them wraps to the beginning like next-completion does.

The wrap behavior is only set for tab and backtab commands (yes, it is
hardcoded there... don't blame me) not even for all next-completion
uses. I prefer not to touch that code anymore or add more stuff
there... At some point we will decide to fix/replace the mouse-face
approach there and all this will be a nightmare to support the legacy
behavior. 

> This means we need a new command next-completion-vertical.

I already tried that in the first version of zcomplete I did long time
ago. And you said (and I agreed) that it was too complicated.