Paul Whitfield writes:
> Paul Kinnucan wrote:
> > Comparing dabbrev to Intellisense is like comparing a brain-damaged
> > nonprogrammer having only short-term memory to a programmer with total
> > recall and a complete command of C++ syntax and the fields and methods
> > of all classes used in the current project including the class of
> > the object at point. dabbrev only "knows" how to complete symbols
> > in open buffers (i.e., in memory). It blindly cycles through every
> > symbol in memory that might complete the text at point, regardless of
> > context. If the symbol you want to complete is not in memory, you're
> > out of luck. Further, if you ask dabbrev to complete obj.getFo and
> > there is a symbol called getFoo in memory, dabbrev will offer getFoo
> > as a completion even if the class of obj has no such method. This is
> > very far from the kind of syntax-, context-, and type-aware method and
> > field completion that the JDEE provides for Java or Microsoft's
> > Intellisense facility provides for C++.
>
> I valid point... however, dabrev is
>
> a) Small
> b) Quick
> c) Works in languages / contexts other than C/C++
> d) Is better than any alternatives than I know about.
>
Yes, but these points are beside the point. A user looking for an
Intellisense-like capability in Emacs doesn't care if dabbrev works
(occasionally) for languages other than C++.