RE: Usability suggestion : completion for M-:

[Drew Adams]

> >>>> I think TAB should be bound to lisp-complete-symbol
> >>>> in M-x eval-expression, aka M-: .
> >> I think the only problem preventing this change is...
> >> When this is fixed, it makes sense to allow TAB to
> >> complete a lisp symbol...
> > 
> > Uh, why? What's wrong with M-TAB or ESC TAB for Lisp symbol 
> > completion, exactly as in a Lisp buffer? If it's good enough
> > for there, and it's always been good enough for here
> > (minibuffer) in the past, why change it? 
> 
> Two things:
> 
> - M-TAB does not work when the window manager eats it breakfast

I said, "M-TAB or ESC TAB". 

> - TAB is rather commonly used for completion (for example 
> when reading file names in Emacs, in shells, hacks to use
> TAB for completions in Emacs are seen as positive by some Emacs users)

Did you read what I wrote? TAB can be used for some other, better completion
in M-: than symbol completion - completion that would be consistent with
other minibuffer completion (complete the whole input, then RET to enter).

An alternative use of TAB for M-: (besides completion) would be to let it do
what it does in Emacs-Lisp mode: indent. I prefer that binding, and I prefer
also adding other Lisp mode bindings to M-:. C-M-q would indent, C-j would
indent (and grow the minibuffer height), and so on.