[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [ELPA] New package: transient

From: 조성빈
Subject: Re: [ELPA] New package: transient
Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 03:10:50 +0900

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> 작성:

From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,
Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 12:48:33 -0400

Typical examples: is it `multibyte-string-p` or `string-multibyte-p`,
`file-name-absolute-p` or `absolute-file-name-p`, ... ?
Then "C-u C-h a WORDS..." is your friend.

Nope, way too slow.

Is that the only problem? then let's speed it up, and Bob's our uncle.

My understanding is that slow here means that opening a new *Apropos*
buffer is an small, but additional mental burden when writing code, and
it slows down writing code.

I shouldn't have to do anything more than `str-mul TAB`.

If you remembered the function's name, yes.  But that's not the use
case we are discussing here.

I think there are a lot of use cases here buried in the flood of mail
- but everyone has a different use case where the prefix-convention will
work better. We’re not trying to say that Emacs’s documentation system is
not useful.

Yes, we can try and improve completion, but we have a real underlying
problem of irregular naming and completion would just help us paper
over it.
The command "C-u C-h d regexp RET" brings up 111 matching functions.
Who will have patience looking through that list, unless the likely
candidates are near the beginning?

IIUC that means you agree with my argument?

Of course not!  I'm saying that "regular naming" will increase the
length of the candidate list.

The regular naming scheme will mean that we can only search functions that
start with regexp - since the searcher doesn’t need grep-regexp-alist or
gmm-regexp-concat when trying to get regexp APIs.

I don't object to this.  I'm just saying that the hope this will allow
you to quickly find that-function-you-almost-remember-the-name-of are
overly optimistic.

We impose a prefix convention on the rest of the Elisp world, and while
some authors don't like it, I find that it is not just useful much more
generally than to avoid conflicts, so we should try and use it for
Emacs's core as well.

The prefix convention we impose has almost nothing to do with the
issue at hand, because the package's name in many (most?) cases says
nothing about its domain of application.  E.g., take message.el or
tmm.el or windmove.el or tempo.el or xdg.el, to name just a few random

It's not a new opinion, BTW: I started doing that back in Emacs-21 with
the newcomment.el package which tried to stick to the "comment-" prefix
even for things which previously used a different name.

Beginner's luck.  Occasionally, this could just happen to work, when
the package's name happens to say something about its purpose.  But
mostly it doesn't, as packages like the one whose name is in the
Subject clearly demonstrate.

reply via email to

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