Re: address@hidden: some other observations on pcomplete]

[Kai Großjohann]

John Wiegley <address@hidden> writes:

>>>>>> On Mon Mar 11, RMS writes:
>
>> That could be an ok solution if it really achieves the effect.  But
>> why have the overhead of loading pcomplete just to get the same
>> results as before?  It seems better just to revert the change;
>> people who want pcomplete behavior can rebind those characters to
>> run pcomplete easily enough.
>
> Mainly because people could then configure them back on.

I agree.  With pcomplete turned on but configured to behave like the
old completion, Custom is good enough to change it.

With TAB bound to the old function, people need to write Lisp in their
init files.  (Since global-set-key is not available via Custom.)

Maybe it would also be a good idea to configure pcomplete in the same
way everywhere (by default), to get uniform behavior.

Also, I gather that with pcomplete it's possible to complete on
command arguments, as well.¹  That's très cool.  The old completion
doesn't offer that.

kai

¹ For instance, "lpr -P" followed by TAB would list all available
  printers.
-- 
Silence is foo!