Re: [PATCH] Re: Other details about completion.

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> writes:

> I'm still unsure which is better.  Maybe M-<down> should not be different
> from M-<PgDown>?  One of them navigates by lines, and another by screenfuls.
> But M-<down> inserts the current completion to the minibuffer,
> whereas M-<PgDown> does not.  Or maybe M-<PgDown> should insert the
> completion as well.

Having M-<PgDown> insert the completion, too, would be sorta more
consistent.  But it doesn't feel natural.  Playing around a bit with the
current key bindings you have now, the actions feel quite natural to me.

>>> 2) The M-<up>/M-<down> is not intuitive when completions are not in
>>> one-column format, and the M-<left>/M-<right> cannot be used because
>>> they are already taken..
>>
>> I agree with that -- I expected M-<down> to work on the visually
>> displayed completions, not the logical order.
>
> Unfortunately, M-<left>/M-<right> can't be used for visual navigation
> from the minibuffer.

Yes, that's a problem.  And we can't rebind M-<left>/<right> there in
general, because it'd be disruptive.

Rebinding them after M-<down> might be an option?  But...  Probably not.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no