Re: Stepping Back: A Wealth Of Completion systems Re: [ELPA] New package: vertico

[Philip Kaludercic]

Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:

> On 08.04.2021 01:59, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
>> Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:
>> 
>>> What I was disagreeing in the previous message, is whether it's worth
>>> to create a semantic distinction between completing-read and
>>> selecting-read. How would a Lisp author choose between the two? The
>>> former should actually be more powerful (it will retain support for
>>> TAB completion, and yet it could still be supported by selection-style
>>> frameworks such as Company or Ivy);
>> completing-read can be more powerful, as it includes expanding text
>> and
>> selecting items, but I if you are not interested in text-expansion you
>> should probably limit yourself to selection,
>
> Am "I" in this example the user, or the author of the caller code?

The I was probably a typo.

>>  so that everyone is ensured
>> to have the same presentation.
>
> If that's the goal, why don't we make sure to include a "selection"
> interface that supports text-expansion as well, like both Company and 
> Ivy do?
>
> What's the purpose of having that distinction?

My hypothisis is that selection is held back by completing-read, and
that a framework that is explicitly made for selection and not
retrofitted into the existing framework could stand to improve the user
experience.

-- 
        Philip K.