[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Q on read-file-name and completion-ignored-extensions

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: Q on read-file-name and completion-ignored-extensions
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:29:53 -0800

    >        This variable does not affect lists of possible completions,
    >        but does affect the commands that actually do completions.

    > That doc string contradicts the `read-file-name' behavior, at
    > least by my reading of it. You say "it works", but by my
    > reading it doesn't work, as I pointed out: `minibuffer-complete'
    > is a "command that actually does completion", but it does not
    > respect this variable when you use it in
    > the context of `read-file-name'.

    minibuffer-complete doesn't only do completion.  It also lists
    possible completions.  When it does completion it does take
    completion-ignored-extensions into account.  When it lists completions
    it doesn't.  Just like the docstring says.

1. Sorry, but I don't see what you're describing, as I said. Leaving aside
listing of possible completions in *Completions* (but see #3),
`minibuffer-complete' (TAB) merrily __completes__ a filename that has a
supposedly ignored extension - it does _not_ take the variable into account.
See the recipe I provided. I don't know how to be clearer: "ignored"
filenames are being completed, not simply displayed in *Completions*.

2. Kevin Rodgers seemed to be saying that he does not see on Solaris the
same behavior I see on Windows. That in itself should indicate a problem

3. If display in *Completions* is what is meant in the doc string by "lists
of possible completions", then I wonder why we have such a design. Why would
we display "possible completions" for the user that are in reality
IMpossible completions for him/her? I interpreted "does not affect lists of
possible completions" to mean that functions such as `all-completions' that
return lists of possible completions are not affected by the variable - that
behavior would make sense to me. Showing completion candidates in
*Completions* that cannot be obtained by completion makes no sense to me.

4. If you are right about the meaning of "does not affect lists of possible
completions", then this phrase should be clarified. If it means only
*Completions* display, then just say that: "does not affect possible
completions listed in buffer *Completions*". If it means also things like
`all-completions', then that should be made clear. The phrase is, to say the
least, open to (mis)interpretation.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]