|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | bug#46627: [PATCH] Add new help command 'describe-command' |
Date: | Tue, 2 Mar 2021 03:40:02 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 |
On 01.03.2021 08:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Do you have in mind some particular "completion alternative we have already" for 'describe-command'?icomplete.el, completion.el, pcomplete.el, and the non-default styles in completion-styles-alist come to mind.All of these (with possible exception of completion.el, which I'm not familiar with) determine how completions are shown and/or how matching is performed, but the total set of completions (completion table) is determined by the command the user invokes.The completion style does determine the set of candidates, if that'sthe only aspect you are interested in.
Completion style only determines how completions are matched, but not the total set of them. That's defined either by the completion table, or by a completion predicate.
And the way the candidates are presented is an important part of how easy and user-friendly discovery is.
Of course.
So they don't include anything that looks like a replacement for 'describe-command'.I wasn't talking only about describe-command, not even in particular about it. I was talking about a much more general issue. If describe-command is the only addition, then I have no problems with that; I only care if that command is the tip of a much larger iceberg.
I don't think it's going to be.Even if we wanted, there are only so many free key bindings anyway. And having more and more commands, bound to different keys, is not actually something that's going to help a new user get oriented quickly.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |