Re: [PATCH] completions-max-height

[Ergus]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 02:29:10PM +0100, Ergus wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 08:47:13AM +0000, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
> > Ergus <spacibba@aol.com> writes:
> >
> > > I understand your intention, but in practice making this more complex
> > > is useless. The mini buffer is always down and making the completions
> > > to move somewhere else is uncomfortable and may require more
> > > lisp/emacs knowledge to change the default behavior from the
> > > user. Which is completely the opposite to my intention. Actually this
> > > same result may be reached with an advise as I discussed on yesterday
> > > on emacs help. But a simple custom is better.
> > >
> > > I am totally fine if you propose something else more general if that don't 
> > > forces the user to write a function to change a simple height.
> >
> > What I proposed would just require something like
> >
> >   (setq completion-display-buffer-option '(display-buffer-at-bottom 
> > (window-height . 10)))
>
> This just works:
>
> (setq display-buffer-alist '(("^\\*Completions\\*$" .
>                               (display-buffer-at-bottom
>                                (window-height . 10)))))
>
> For the simplest case this works... But there is not a way to handle the
> conditionals without affecting some users. For example when using inline
> completion or the ones using resize-temp-buffer-window
>
> We can use a function instead, but in that case the user customization
> may need a more complex approach instead of just a setq.
>
> Maybe a better lisper could propose something better that allows to set
> this without a defun, an advise or defining a tricky alist that may
> conflict with something else?
After a day with this config I found several issues.

At the end it required to do:

(add-to-list 'display-buffer-alist
             '("^\\*Completions\\*$" .
               ((display-buffer--maybe-same-window
                display-buffer-reuse-window
                display-buffer--maybe-pop-up-frame)
                (window-height . 10))))

Otherwise many things happen (completions buffer replication for not
reusing window, not popup frames and so on.)

So at the end I think that the initial patch is the best simpler
approach (the code could be simplified even more by a better lisper
probably) because otherwise the user may need do a complex config for a
most simple need, creating conflicts and changing some of the default
behaviors...

Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.

Best,
Ergus