[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: feature/icomplete-vertical

From: Ergus
Subject: Re: feature/icomplete-vertical
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 12:47:27 +0200

On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 08:35:24AM +0000, Gregory Heytings via Emacs 
development discussions. wrote:

There is another corner case that is when

(frame-parameter nil 'minibuffer) is 'only. This was also a problem reported some days ago needed when using frames and not the minibuffer.

Hmmm... in that case (a corner case, indeed, which does not seem to be covered by the current icomplete implementation), it means that the minibuffer is not resized att all? TBH, it seems to me that using icomplete with a minibuffer-only frame does not have much sense.

Some users of maple-minibuffer-mode uses them with icomplete + the
external package.

That being said, it is always possible to imagine more corner cases, for example a completion candidate that would fill more than one line,
I know, for this the users set visual-line in minibuffer. Which I
probably will do to.

or a completion candidate list with different fonts (I'm not sure that
this is actually feasible)

This is the reason of the "format" approach I was trying; and why
working directly in pixels as it is simple to get the current line
height in pixels too and increment it more precisely. But I consider
this as a different feature too, so it is not in that patch.

, or completion candidates with embedded newlines, or...

Covered with the format approach too, but also a new feature.

The other problem with the patch is that due to rounding and floor when using different fonts there is too much extra space missing and sometimes missed a candidate at the end. This was also reported some days ago.

I don't think so, but I could be wrong. I tested my code with many different parameters, and did not see the "extra space" you mention, in all cases the completions fit perfectly in the minibuffer, and the prompt is never hidden.

Or I could, but I had issues before with this before.

Look at the attached patch as it is partially simplified in my local branch.

Thanks, I'll have a look.


reply via email to

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