[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Interactive guide for new users

From: Ergus
Subject: Re: Interactive guide for new users
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 15:18:02 +0200

On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 03:34:35PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:16:03 +0200
From: Ergus <spacibba@aol.com>
Cc: Gregory Heytings <ghe@sdf.org>, casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org

>My point is that we should not put there unimportant options, let
>alone those which we recommend not to change from the defaults.
We could add and extra optional SCREEN with advanced options. The user
can click next if done with the options in this page or advanced and go
for a more detailed and longer list of options.

Once we come up with the list of options we consider important and
useful for this target audience, we can then discuss whether the list
is long enough to warrant splitting.


>Then perhaps we need to develop a new completion mechanism.  Which
>IDEs show completion like icomplete-mode?
Sublime and atom have a menu pretty similar to ours. A bit more
graphical oriented, but in the same "spirit".

"Spirit" is not what's important here, IMO.  What's important is the
visual appearance and the available actions and their effects.  What I
see out there is similar to Company, and quite different from
icomplete-mode, even when augmented by the vertical sub-mode.

We have xref-find-apropos and completion-at-point. But icomplete use is
totally different to company.

icomplete is more a minibuffer completion engine useful while tipping
commands, of lookign for files. There a company panel is uncomfortable.

While company-mode is a "suggestion menu" while editing. Maybe our error
have been to consider both as a single "feature".

Dimitry is the "company boss" ;) if you want it by default I don't think
anyone will have complains about as company is in general very popular.

Most external popular completions engines like LSP support company throw
company-capf or completion-at-point.

What's do you think is better to invest time improving the
completion-at-point or port Company to vanilla?

reply via email to

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