[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: propose adding Icicles to Emacs

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: propose adding Icicles to Emacs
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 05:44:10 -0400

    If integrated with Emacs, this could be done by changing `completing-read'
    etc. to act differently when `icicle-mode' is on, unless that is a no-no.

It is not out of the question to do this.  However, it would be nicer
to find a cleaner way.  Can you do most of these changes through key
bindings?  Which changes are left, that can't be done that way (or not
cleanly)?  Can we find non-ad-hoc ways of implementing them?

      it can replace some top-level commands with Icicles
    versions (e.g. `find-file' with `icicle-find-file').

Why does it do this?

    >     * Multi-commands: Define a command that acts on one foobar,
    >       and be able to use it also on multiple foobars in a single
    >       invocation.
    > How is that implemented?

    A minibuffer key binding, `C-RET' (or `C-mouse-2' in
    `completion-list-mode-map'), calls a command that acts on the current
    completion candidate, where "current" is determined by cycling or matching.

How does it know what to call?  Is it the same command that invoked
the minibuffer?  Do you have to define a new function for this,
one for each command that uses the feature?

It sounds like an ugly mechanism, so if this feature is worth adding,
I would rather it be implemented differently.  The cleanest way I can
think of is to set a flag telling call-interactively to call the
function then loop around, keeping the same prefix argument.

This should work with ALL commands and avoid the need to define
separate multi-commands.

Once multi-commands are gone, does Icicles need to
redefine any commands?  Is it just a matter of changes
inside completing-read?

reply via email to

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