Re: Inline completion preview

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 01/11/2023 13:07, João Távora wrote:
> > > Also are you 100% sure Company doesn't do this?  I'm pretty sure
> > > it does this when there is only one completion, at least.
> > No, I'm sure Company does do more or less this.  As you say, and as I
> > mentioned upthread, Company provides a preview frontend that kicks in
> > when there's just one completion candidate by default.  (This is in
> > contrast with `corfu`, that provides no such preview.)  There are some
> > differences between my implementation and what you get with Company's
> > preview frontend, but if Company would make it to core Emacs that would
> > indeed mostly obviate the need for my `completion-preview`, at least as
> > far as I'm concerned.  Is there a viable path for upstreaming Company?
> I've suggested this in the past, and it's mostly for Dmitry to answer,
> but IMO that path should definitely contain a scaling back of Company's
> company-backends infrastructure, basically importing only company-capf,
> which is (IME of course) the only real backend we should focus on. This
> would help sanitize some of the incorrect perceptions of complexity in
> Company setup (the kind that Alex's argument suffers from).

If we simply do that, I'll end up with bug reports from users with two 
different configurations and sets of capabilities (under the same name).

And a lot of users wondering why many snippets they found on the 
Internet (or even in the current manual) dosn't work because the Emacs's 
built-in distribution of Company doesn't include all other backends.

If/when we migrate to a new and better completion API, we'll discuss 
migrating all of Company's completion sources to it.

Alternatively, we keep migrating the backends to the current CAPF 
format. But then, to support "merging" completions, the core would need 
to include something like the capf combinators from Daniel's cape.el. 
But that is the scenario where we drop the idea of CAPFv2 and try 
evolving the current one gradually.