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

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
> Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 18:14:02 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> But this raises a more general question, of whether selecting-read and
> >> completing-read should be drop-in replacements of one another.
> >
> > I think they should strive to, because it's conceivable that we will
> > have a user option to determine which one to call where currently we
> > call completing-read.
> 
> But why should that mean that both interfaces should be identical?  It
> seems cleaner to instead have a sr->cr translation layer, as to prevent
> unnecessary dependencies between the two interfaces?

I don't understand what you mean by "translation layer".

What I have in mind is a user option that tells completing-read to
invoke the "selection kind" of UI.  It follows that being able to use
the same arguments and data structures would be a boon for allowing
that.

And note that I said "should strive to", not "should be".  If there
are good reasons why they cannot have the same or similar enough
signatures, it's not a catastrophe.  But we should have a good reason,
IMO.