[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 13:22:54 +0000

On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 12:04 PM Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> You could, but since that's how Emacs worked for the last 11 years, I
> don't see how such a claim would stand.

Well, SLIME's fuzzy is older than that, for example.  So age
is not a major factor factor here. Also, the current behaviour
was adopted when there was NO flex in Emacs.  If there would
have been, the decision would have been different, IMO.

> I tried that with different styles, including flex, and I still don't
> agree with you about the need to reverse the emphasis.  So what you
> think must be the default at least for me doesn't sound 100% correct,
> as I find flex very usable for me with the current method of emphasis.

I'm very happy that you find it usable. However, I have the
conviction -- what I've been trying to persuade you of that
conviction -- that it is _more_ useful for the remaining
population of existing flex users _when_ it has the highlighting
I propose.  If you take one of my proposals, then you, as
an individual from a new population of flex users migrating
from 'prefix' can still customize it to adhere to your longstanding
'prefix' habits. Or you can adapt to what I think is the majority's
use of 'flex'.

> I'm sorry, but that's not how defaults in Emacs change, not because
> you give me your word or describe what other applications do.  Not
> when the proposed behavior is in such stark contrast to what we've
> been doing for years.  We first introduce such a new feature as
> optional, and later change it to be the default based on user reports
> and complaints.  I suggest to do the same in this case.

Again, I must stress that the latest proposal is NOT a change in
defaults because the people starting out emacs with no settings
whatsoever would see _absolutely_ no new behaviour.  It is only
people that _enable_ the new matching style 'flex', which I
implemented some months ago, that would see the highlighting
the way I propose it.

I will, as I have already done, concede that it is a change in what
you and others have called "consistency" between matching styles.
I have explained enough, I think, why I think this isn't a big problem.
But in any case it is NOT a change in defaults, unless you are
considering that there is already a large number of 'flex' users
tracking the Emacs master branch between some months ago and
today that rely on it functioning the way it does.  I do not think that
is the case.

(Note, to avoid a frequent misunderstanding, that I'm talking strictly
about my latest 2 proposals, alright? the "renames" one and the
"new-face-just-for-flex".  Again I did indeed propose earlier a change
in defaults, which I abandoned.)

Also, as another data point, you need not travel beyond Emacs-land
to see examples that corroborate my vision. You needn't even travel
farther than GNU ELPA, I believe.  Company's tooltip behaves like I
describe, and so does Ivy.  A little farther you have Helm, an extremely
popular extension, and SLIME, and SLY.


reply via email to

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