GNU bug report logs - #65348
INITIAL-INPUT in completing-read repeats same entry twice consecutively

Previous Next

Full log

Message #171 received at 65348 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Heime <heimeborgia <at> protonmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, Christopher Dimech <dimech <at> gmx.com>,
 65348 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams <at> oracle.com
Subject: Re: [External] : bug#65348: INITIAL-INPUT in completing-read repeats
 same entry twice consecutively
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 13:27:21 +0000

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, August 22nd, 2023 at 12:25 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:


> > From: Christopher Dimech dimech <at> gmx.com
> > Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, 65348 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> > heimeborgia <at> protonmail.com, drew.adams <at> oracle.com
> > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 14:07:07 +0200
> > 
> > > There are no plans to remove INITIAL-INPUT, if that's what you are
> > > asking. We cannot possibly remove it, ever. The argument is not
> > > deprecated; its use is "deprecated" (a.k.a. "discouraged"), that's
> > > all.
> > 
> > INITIAL-INPUT is basically meant for prefilling the minibuffer with an entry.
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > Do not see anything to encourage or discourage.
> 
> 
> The doc string and the manual explain this.
> 
> > Perhaps renaming it would be more appropriate to describe what
> > actually happens ?
> 
> 
> I see no reason to rename, as the current name describes the purpose
> quite well.

Consequently, its _use_ should not be discouraged.  It is for the person 
calling the function to decide whether it is appropriate for their package.

Is prefilling the minibuffer wrong as matter of principle ?  Or just that 
on occasions it is not useful ?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.