bug#62029: 29.0.60; Allow users to customize eldoc buffer separator

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 11/04/2023 14:25, João Távora wrote:
> Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev> writes:
>
> > On 30/03/2023 11:13, João Távora wrote:
> >
> > > > > You do need to set eldoc-documentation-strategy to
> > > > > eldoc-documentation-compose though (this should really
> > > > > be the default).
> > > >
> > > > Huh, I wonder why I can see both flymake + eglot in the eldoc doc
> > > > buffer when my eldoc-documentation-strategy is the default value?
> > > Because Eglot changes eldoc-documentation-strategy automatically.
> > > It
> > > shouldn't but the default value is really bad.
> > > The reason the default value is historic.  Previously, there was a
> > > single producer of ElDoc, and only in Emacs Lisp.  It would decide
> > > whether to show variable _or_ function doc, even if a given symbol had
> > > more than one meaning.  So what's the problem with setting
> > > eldoc-documentation-strategy something like e-d-compose, you ask.
> > > Well, because of the default value of
> > > eldoc-echo-area-use-multiline-p,
> > > people would be seeing "bouncing" in the echo area while editing Elisp,
> > > which is something they are not used to.
> > > I think a very good solution is to set e-d-strategy to e-d-compose
> > > globally and e-e-a-use-multiline-p to 1 in emacs-lisp-mode.
> > > I once proposed this in this bug tracker, but the message was
> > > garbled by
> > > some side discussion, and I gave up.  And ElDoc wasn't so powerful then.
> >
> > Last time I tested Eglot's behavior (recently),
>
> How "recently"?  Does it have this commit?
>
> commit d00e05daa96700860dbb9dc6527105e464ffb960
> Author: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
> Date:   Sat Mar 25 19:53:14 2023 +0000
>
>      Eglot: take advantage of new Eldoc options for signature doc
>      
>      Only echo the "active signature", send all the other signatures for
>      the *eldoc* buffer.
>      
>      * lisp/progmodes/eglot.el (eglot--sig-info): Rework protocol.
>      (eglot-signature-eldoc-function): Rework.
>
> This is also in the latest released Eglot 1.14, btw.

I retested it just yesterday (and now as well), to take that screenshot.

But that was Emacs 29. With current master, it is indeed better.

> > Eldoc took away half the window to display the overloads of a
> > function's signature. Screenshot attached.
>
> This is exactly what I've been working on and discussing with Yuan and
> others, so I'm pretty familiar with the situation.

> > That doesn't look like good behavior to me, no matter the language or
> > IDE package used.
>
> I agree, and this is why I changed it.  Let's hope noone complains
> (unlikely, but possible, as this changed longstanding behaviour).
>
> But here I was describing something not related to Eglot at all, rather
> elisp-mode.el.  Do you have something to say about that?  Did you try
> the patch I showed Yuan?

I have applied it. What should I be looking at?