[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: VOTE: Changing completions-common-part face's default

From: João Távora
Subject: Re: VOTE: Changing completions-common-part face's default
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:42:31 +0000

On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 7:30 AM Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

> > One of the main use cases I have for the highlighting is to
> > input that keyword to see what "era" symbol I want.  I don't know
> > the symbol I want until I start seeing the large list. Then I add another
> > little sub-concept word to narrow down, and repeat. Flex helps
> > me explore. I wish I could share with you the function names
> > I have to work with, but as you can understand, I can't.
> It is OK to have special needs,

I could just as well illustrate your use 'prefix'
need-to-see-the-first-difference case as a special need.
"special" in contrast to what I would suppose is the "norm"
is not very useful here, especially when applied to a new
feature. My position is that your argument is weak also
because you don't have enough first-hand knowledge to
talk about special needs __in the "flex" context__

I view your argument about consistency as a bit stronger,
but also ultimately weaker than mine. Tough the  fact that
it is stronger is why I first proposed the reversion of
faces in the 'basic' case.

I gave my example as a data point. Take my word that it affects
more people that I work with. SLIME's authors must also felt
the "special need" back in 2006.  Probably all the authors/users
of every other flex system in the world also feel that "special
need" (though, they are using other editors and have stated your
don't value their opinion much -- contrary to me.).

> an opt-in feature; it can later become the default if enough users
> tell they want it.

Sure, of course, I hope so.


reply via email to

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