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

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 20:16:29 +0300
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
> 
> I agree we should be able to keep both kinds of completion and let the 
> users choose they generally prefer, that's why I made emphasis on which 
> usages really *can't* employ the wrong kind of completion (and thus 
> would generally follow the programmer's hint and not the user 
> customization).

I'm not sure there could be use cases where it is clear up front which
UI is "right" and which is "wrong".  In every situation I thought
about there could be a place for both, depending on what the user
wants to do and how.

> I do think it's unfortunate you're adamant about using only one of these 
> approaches, because we're missing out on valuable feedback and 
> recommendations this way (and maybe some strategic support)

You make it sound like I could easily use the other approach, but just
won't because I'm stubborn or worse.  Nothing is farther from the
truth.  I cannot change my workflows, they are burnt into my muscle
memory.  I can only try "the other approach" briefly, and that is
unlikely to give you any useful feedback.