Re: Updating *Completions* as you type

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com>
> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 14:17:57 -0500
> Cc: juri@linkov.net, sbaugh@catern.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 10:52 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
>  > From: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com>
>  > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 10:21:47 -0500
>  > Cc: juri@linkov.net, sbaugh@catern.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>  > I feel confident that more users will understand "History order" than "in 
> the
>  > order of their typing".
>  > 
>  > How about "Sorted in the order of minibuffer history"?
> 
>  That's better, but if you are okay with that, how about "Sorted in the
>  chronological order of minibuffer input"?
> 
> That does not mention history, so I think it's worse - how are user supposed 
> to know it's about
> history?

?? Didn't you yourself say several messages ago it was NOT about
history?  I quote:

> > Oh, no, this is about sorting completion candidates, not history.

So now you say this IS about history?

> But I'm okay with "Sorted in chronological order of minibuffer history".

This is tautology: history is always in chronological order.  We are
in effect wasting one word by repeating another.