[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [External] : Re: Improvement proposals for `completing-read'

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Improvement proposals for `completing-read'
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 21:22:57 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1

On 08.04.2021 20:22, Drew Adams wrote:
But using it only for
disambiguation should be okay. Then one would only compute the
annotation when doing the actual completion?
No, annotations should not be used as the, or even as
a, means of disambiguating candidates.  That would be
an ugly and limiting hack.

Annotations are user-visible.  They have their own
use cases.  Making them take on the role of
disambiguating candidates - and especially making
them be_the_  means of disambiguating - would be
misguided, IMO.

That's exactly why they are a good means of disambiguating completions: completions with different annotations have something for the user to distinguish them with.

I'm not sure about annotation auto-generation, though.

reply via email to

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