RE: Any objection to adding completing-read-function?

[Drew Adams]

> I have been locally using a variable like that to replace
> completing-read with ido-completing-read and it appears to me 
> to improve efficiency in many places.
> 
> So I wonder if there is any objection to adding a new variable
> completing-read-function that when set replaces 
> completing-read? Let me know if I should submit it to the
> bug tracker.

Thank you, Leo.  I strongly support such a change (I've requested it in the
past).

It lets you do for `completing-read' what you have been able to do for
`read-file-name' since it was moved to Lisp: write your own completion function
yet have ordinary, existing calls to `completing-read' pick that up.

No need to redefine or advise anything.  No need to limit your changes to what
is allowed/foreseen by the implementation of `completing-read'.

And of course you can scope such a behavior change within a minor mode or using
`let' instead of `setq'.

Very simple, clean.  Thanks.