Am 01.11.23 um 13:23 Uhr schrieb Dmitry Gutov:
I've suggested this in the past, and it's mostly for Dmitry to answer,
but IMO that path should definitely contain a scaling back of Company's
company-backends infrastructure, basically importing only company-capf,
which is (IME of course) the only real backend we should focus on. This
would help sanitize some of the incorrect perceptions of complexity in
Company setup (the kind that Alex's argument suffers from).
If we simply do that, I'll end up with bug reports from users with two
different configurations and sets of capabilities (under the same name).
And a lot of users wondering why many snippets they found on the
Internet (or even in the current manual) dosn't work because the Emacs's
built-in distribution of Company doesn't include all other backends.
If/when we migrate to a new and better completion API, we'll discuss
migrating all of Company's completion sources to it.
I'd like to second this suggestion as a user writing more prose than
code, although I also write a lot of prose in LaTeX which seems to be
somewhere in between. 😉
When playing with different "completion frameworks" for a while lately,
in the end I stuck with company. But the only backend in Company I could
actually use was company-dabbrev because with dabbrev it is possible to
set company-dabbrev-ignore-case to nil. Without this, whatever kind of
completion you implement will be mostly useless if you use it in a
language environment where case needs to be preserved like, e.g.,
German. So could you please consider this use-case. Thank you.