bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#48764: [External] : bug#48764: mini-buffer completion


From: Drew Adams
Subject: bug#48764: [External] : bug#48764: mini-buffer completion
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:00:47 +0000

> > But the mini-buffer does not provide the user with any indication that
> > he can use the "up" and "down" keys to navigate a list of settings.
> > It would be beneficial to introduce some kind of glyph or indicator in
> > the mini-buffer to make the user aware that arrow keys can be used,
> > and be described in the manual.
> 
> It should not come as a surprise that basic navigation keys allow you to
> navigate basically.
> 
> Closing.

I wouldn't argue that the minibuffer itself needs to
provide any such indication.  (Some doc should perhaps
mention it, however.)  I agree with you about that.

But the reply that users should expect "basic navigation
keys" to "navigate basically" presents things in a
distorted way.

Basic navigation keys generally do work in the basic,
i.e., ordinary way in the minibuffer.  But <up> and
<down> do NOT do so.  Their normal/basic behavior is
to move up or down a line of text.  They _could_ do that
in the minibuffer, but they don't.  Likewise, `C-n' and
`C-p'.

So while I tend to agree that the minibuffer itself
need not advertise what <up> and <down> do, the argument
that you gave is specious, IMO.  In fact, it argues the
opposite: it argues that <up> and <down> (and `C-[n|p]')
should "allow you to navigate basically", i.e., move up
and down a line of minibuffer text.

Not to mention that _cycling_ candidates is not a basic
navigation behavior.  It's not a navigation behavior at
all.  It doesn't move point or the mouse pointer, doesn't
move focus, or do any of the things one might think of as
"basic navigation" behavior.





reply via email to

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