Re: Project support and completions

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:03:18 +0200
> From: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
> 
> On 01/25/2015 09:22 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > No, I want to see prin1, princ, prin1-to-string, etc.  printf is
> > really not what I want to see.
> 
> Then don't press `M-.' when point is on `printf', and don't type 
> `printf' into the `C-u M-.' prompt. Problem solved?

No, because I don't only want to see the identifiers which are already
near point.  Sometimes they are, but not always.  That's why M-. still
allows me to type a symbol name, even though it offers what's at point
as the default guess.  E.g., imagine that I need to use some printing
function for a Lisp object, but don't quite remember which ones we
have and what they do, exactly.

> > This discussion is about specifying the solutions.
> 
> I wouldn't say so. For instance, I consider tag files a very 
> unsatisfactory source for completions (imprecise and often incomplete), 
> but you and a certain slice of users are fine with them.

I will be even more fine with a better solution.  So far, it's you who
insist that I stay with the etags backend.

> For me, this discussion is mostly about clarifying some new requirements 
> for a project API.

That's very much related.  You need to have the possible solutions in
your sights when you design the APIs.