GNU bug report logs - #994
23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>

Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:05:05 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Done: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 994 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 994 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:57:00 -0700
emacs -Q
 
Given an existing file foo-bar.el, do `M-x foo-b RET', getting a new
buffer `foo-b'.
 
Then do `C-x C-v TAB'. There is no completion of `foo-b' to
`foo-bar.el', because (a) point is just after the directory name,
before `foo-b' (as it should be) and (b) completion now acts only
on the text before point.
 
This non-completion is a "feature" introduced in Emacs 22, the idea
being that only stuff to the left of point should be completed. To me,
this is a bug (misfeature), and this is a good example why.
 
Another example is when point is in the middle of some text that can
be completed, but it is completed differently from what the completion
of the whole minibuffer content would be. E.g. `M-x foo-toto', with
point after `foo' completes (I think) to `foo-bar.eltoto', which is
not helpful.
 
The user now needs to pay attention to where the cursor is. Previously
the entire minibuffer contents (after the prompt) were taken into
consideration for completion, just as they are for input (RET).

This boils down to forcing users to use `C-e' to complete the entire
input versus, in Emacs 20-21, users who wanted to complete only the
text before point using `C-k'. Seems like not a big deal, but in
practice I find it annoying. What's more, it is inconsistent with
the behavior of RET, which does act on the complete minibuffer input.
 
If Emacs Development won't remove this "feature", then please at least
provide a user option to obtain the previous, sane behavior.
 
Actually, in Emacs 23, things are worse yet. I have a file
`icicles-mcmd.el'. I type `M-x icicles-mcfoobar' and hit TAB with
point after the `mc'. It completes to `icicles-mcicles-foobar'.
Huh? No idea what logic is behind that, but perhaps it has to do
with the new automatic partical completion mode (which is also a
design mistake, IMO).  If instead point is at the end of the
input for `M-x icicles-mcfoobar', then it completes to
`icicles-mcfoobaricles'. Huh? Again, no idea what the logic is
behind this misbehavior.
 
IMO, the original (Emacs 20 or 21) behavior was superior: (1)
more efficient for editing (arguable, admittedly) and certainly
(2) much less confusing and more consistent. Please provide a
user option (or two, if necessary) so users can get back the
previous behavior.
 

In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2008-09-03 on LENNART-69DE564
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4) --no-opt --cflags -Ic:/g/include
-fno-crossjumping'
 





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> suse.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> suse.de>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:32:41 +0200
"Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> emacs -Q
>  
> Given an existing file foo-bar.el, do `M-x foo-b RET', getting a new
> buffer `foo-b'.
>  
> Then do `C-x C-v TAB'. There is no completion of `foo-b' to
> `foo-bar.el', because (a) point is just after the directory name,
> before `foo-b' (as it should be) and (b) completion now acts only
> on the text before point.
>  
> This non-completion is a "feature" introduced in Emacs 22, the idea
> being that only stuff to the left of point should be completed. To me,
> this is a bug (misfeature), and this is a good example why.

Counter example: I visit a file, then want to visit a new file with the
same name but in a different directory.  Type C-x C-f <left> <down>,
edit the directory before point and type TAB.  I expect to get the
directory part properly completed although the file does not exist.
Completion is inherently context dependent.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab <at> suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."




Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> suse.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: RE: bug#994: 23.0.60;minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:41:03 -0700
> From: Drew Adams Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 1:57 PM
> emacs -Q
>  
> Given an existing file foo-bar.el, do `M-x foo-b RET', getting a new
> buffer `foo-b'.

Sorry, I meant `C-x C-f', not `M-x'.





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #30 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Andreas Schwab'" <schwab <at> suse.de>
Cc: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: RE: bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:47:54 -0700
> From: Andreas Schwab Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:33 PM
> "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:
> > emacs -Q
> >  
> > Given an existing file foo-bar.el, do `M-x foo-b RET', getting a new
> > buffer `foo-b'.
> >  
> > Then do `C-x C-v TAB'. There is no completion of `foo-b' to
> > `foo-bar.el', because (a) point is just after the directory name,
> > before `foo-b' (as it should be) and (b) completion now acts only
> > on the text before point.
> >  
> > This non-completion is a "feature" introduced in Emacs 22, the idea
> > being that only stuff to the left of point should be 
> > completed. To me, this is a bug (misfeature), and this is a good
> > example why.
> 
> Counter example: I visit a file, then want to visit a new 
> file with the
> same name but in a different directory.  Type C-x C-f <left> <down>,
> edit the directory before point and type TAB.  I expect to get the
> directory part properly completed although the file does not exist.
> Completion is inherently context dependent.

Sure there are counter examples, and that's a good one. And different users have
different preferences wrt which examples (behaviors) are most important to them.

All I'm asking for is a way to return to the previous behavior, which I prefer.
Call it a bug or a feature, as you like. I would like a user option to be able
to choose the alternative behavior.

And the other part of the bug report, which is Emacs 23-specific (related to
automatic partial completion?) is something else again. There too there should
be an easy and obvious way to turn off such smart/silly (your choice) behavior.





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #40 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:26:06 -0400
> Actually, in Emacs 23, things are worse yet. I have a file
> `icicles-mcmd.el'. I type `M-x icicles-mcfoobar' and hit TAB with
> point after the `mc'. It completes to `icicles-mcicles-foobar'.
> Huh? No idea what logic is behind that, but perhaps it has to do
> with the new automatic partical completion mode (which is also a
> design mistake, IMO).  If instead point is at the end of the
> input for `M-x icicles-mcfoobar', then it completes to
> `icicles-mcfoobaricles'. Huh? Again, no idea what the logic is
> behind this misbehavior.
 
Can you provide a recipe to reproduce the above two behaviors?


        Stefan




Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #50 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Stefan Monnier'" <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, <emacs-pretest-bug <at> gnu.org>
Subject: RE: bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all minibuffer input
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:33:25 -0700
> > Actually, in Emacs 23, things are worse yet. I have a file
> > `icicles-mcmd.el'. I type `M-x icicles-mcfoobar' and hit TAB with
> > point after the `mc'. It completes to `icicles-mcicles-foobar'.
> > Huh? No idea what logic is behind that, but perhaps it has to do
> > with the new automatic partical completion mode (which is also a
> > design mistake, IMO).  If instead point is at the end of the
> > input for `M-x icicles-mcfoobar', then it completes to
> > `icicles-mcfoobaricles'. Huh? Again, no idea what the logic is
> > behind this misbehavior.
>  
> Can you provide a recipe to reproduce the above two behaviors?

Exactly the recipe I gave above (with the correction I sent later
that I meant `C-x C-f', not `M-x'):

emacs -Q
Create a file icicles-mcmd.el in directory /my/dir.

C-x C-f
Find file: /my/dir/icicles-mcfoobar TAB
                             ^
                             +-- point here
gives:

Find file: /my/dir/icicles-mcicles-foobar

And:

Find file: /my/dir/icicles-mcfoobar TAB
                                   ^
                                   +-- point here
gives:

Find file: /my/dir/icicles-mcicles-foobaricles

In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2008-09-03 on LENNART-69DE564
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4) --no-opt --cflags -Ic:/g/include
-fno-crossjumping'





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Severity set to `wishlist' from `normal' Request was from Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com> to control <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com. (Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:50:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #62 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>,
        "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>,
        <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Cc: "'Emacs Bugs'" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: RE: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:38:16 -0700
> From: Emacs bug Tracking System Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 3:50 PM
> Processing commands for control <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com:
> 
> > severity 994 wishlist
> bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all 
> minibuffer input
> Severity set to `wishlist' from `normal'

Why is this fodder for the wishlist? This bug is a regression!

Stefan asked for a recipe to reproduce it, so no doubt this behavior is not
intentional (not a design change). It is bad, bugged behavior, and it is new. 

Why on earth would such a bug report be classified as "wish list"? Perhaps you
are simply wishing bugs away? ;-)





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #67 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
To: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>,
        <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, 1055-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:59:14 -0400
"Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> Why is this fodder for the wishlist? This bug is a regression!
>
> Stefan asked for a recipe to reproduce it, so no doubt this behavior is not
> intentional (not a design change). It is bad, bugged behavior, and it is new. 
>
> Why on earth would such a bug report be classified as "wish list"? Perhaps you
> are simply wishing bugs away? ;-)

Please don't make a separate CC to bug-gnu-emacs; that creates a new bug
entry.  Just reply to NNN <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

The bug in question is not a regression, unless you have a rather broad
definition of "regression".  It is neither obviously buggy nor new, so
I'd prefer it if people work on the other outstanding issues first.

But if it bugs you that much... patch welcome.  I don't want to waste
time debating bug classification.



Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #72 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
Cc: "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>,
        <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, <schwab <at> suse.de>
Subject: RE: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:09:00 -0700
> > Why is this fodder for the wishlist? This bug is a regression!
> >
> > Stefan asked for a recipe to reproduce it, so no doubt this 
> > behavior is not intentional (not a design change). It is bad,
> > bugged behavior, and it is new. 
> >
> > Why on earth would such a bug report be classified as "wish 
> > list"? Perhaps you are simply wishing bugs away? ;-)
> 
> Please don't make a separate CC to bug-gnu-emacs; that 
> creates a new bug entry.  Just reply to NNN <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

I used Reply All. mea culpa.

FYI, 994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org was not even in the list of recipients - I
had to add it manually. So neither Reply nor Reply All does the job.

> The bug in question is not a regression, unless you have a 
> rather broad definition of "regression".

Of course it is a regression. What is your definition? 

* No such crazy completion occurred in Emacs 22 or 21 or 20 or 19 or 18.

* And it is apparently not intentional behavior.

* And it is bad behavior - no rationale has been given for it, and the developer
was apparently surprised by it, asking for a recipe to reproduce it.

Why would you call behavior that is new, unintentional, and bad anything BUT a
regression? What would you call it?

> It is neither obviously buggy nor new, 

Of course it is new. Repeat the same recipe in Emacs 22, 21, or 20 - you will
not see anything like what I reported.

How can you say that `read-file-name' completing (with an existing file
`icicles-mcmd.el') the input `icicles-mcfoobar' to `icicles-mcicles-foobar' is
correct? There is no such file. Emacs should signal that there are no
completions.

How can you say that completing the same input to `icicles-mcfoobaricles' is
also correct? Again, there is no such file. Emacs should signal that there are
no completions.

Even if you adopt the point of view that only what is before point should be
completed, ignoring what comes after point, the result must be a valid
completion (existing file name). With that point of view, it might be correct to
*replace* the text to the right of point and leave the completed file name
`icicles-mcmd.el'. But there is no way that it makes sense to complete to
`icicles-mcicles-foobar' or `icicles-mcfoobaricles'. 

Please think about it. This is totally silly.

------------8<----------------------

Newsflash -

I just tried again, using this build:

In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2008-09-18 on LENNART-69DE564
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4) --no-opt --cflags -Ic:/g/include
-fno-crossjumping'

And the bug is fixed in that build. I retested using the version I reported it
in, just to be sure, and the bug does exist there, as reported:

In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2008-09-03 on LENNART-69DE564
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4) --no-opt --cflags -Ic:/g/include
-fno-crossjumping'

However, FWIW, the behavior now is not the same as in Emacs 22:

In GNU Emacs 22.2.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2008-03-26 on RELEASE
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4)'

In Emacs 22.2 (I don't have 22.3, but I'm guessing it's the same):
icicles-mcfoobar completes to icicles-mcmd.elfoobar, when point is on the m.
When point is at the end (after the r), you get a [No match] message.

In Emacs 23, you get a [No match] message in both cases. I'm OK with that, but
see Andreas Schwab's reply - he might not be OK with it.

In addition to these examples being fixed, the other example I gave, of first
doing C-x C-f icicles-mc RET and then C-x C-v TAB seems also to be fixed - it
now completes to icicles-mcmd.el. (This part of the original report was stated
in terms of foo-bar.el, not icicles-mcmd.el.)

So if nothing changes (;-)), I'm OK with closing this bug - it seems to be
fixed. Thanks to whoever fixed it (probably Stefan).

However, this does represent a change in design (intentional user-visible
behavior change) wrt Emacs 22. I'm OK with this change, but it was not something
that was discussed in emacs-devel <at> gnu.org. There have been a lot of changes to
the completion behavior that were never discussed. That's not the right way to
run things, IMHO.






Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #77 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>,
        schwab <at> suse.de, "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>
Subject: Re: bug#994: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:09:31 -0400
> How can you say that completing the same input to `icicles-mcfoobaricles' is
> also correct? Again, there is no such file. Emacs should signal that there are
> no completions.

Indeed it looks like a bug to me.
But IIUC the rest of your message says that the bug is now gone, right?


        Stefan




Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #82 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Stefan Monnier'" <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>,
        <schwab <at> suse.de>, "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>
Subject: RE: bug#994: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:15:50 -0700
> > How can you say that completing the same input to 
> > `icicles-mcfoobaricles' is also correct? Again, there
> > is no such file. Emacs should signal that there are
> > no completions.
> 
> Indeed it looks like a bug to me.
> But IIUC the rest of your message says that the bug is now 
> gone, right?

Yes, I believe so, at least in the version (2008-09-18) I mentioned.

Thanks.





Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #87 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA>
To: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>,
        <schwab <at> suse.de>, "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>
Subject: Re: bug#994: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:59:33 -0400
> Yes, I believe so, at least in the version (2008-09-18) I mentioned.

Wonderful.  If it appears again, please file a new bug,


        Stefan




Information forwarded to bug-submit-list <at> lists.donarmstrong.com, Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>:
bug#994; Package emacs. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #92 received at 994 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Stefan Monnier'" <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: <994 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>,
        <schwab <at> suse.de>, "'Emacs bug Tracking System'" <don <at> donarmstrong.com>
Subject: RE: bug#994: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:10:55 -0700
> > Yes, I believe so, at least in the version (2008-09-18) I mentioned.
> 
> Wonderful.  If it appears again, please file a new bug,

OK.





bug closed, send any further explanations to "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> Request was from Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:38:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:24:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 15 years and 182 days ago.

Previous Next


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