Re: enabling company-capf support in cfengine.el

[Stefan Monnier]

> Sometime ago I've been told that RMS dislikes Clang strongly enough to
> oppose inclusion of any code using it in Emacs.

AFAIK Clang is Free Software.  So, I don't see a valid reason to reject
inclusion of company-clang or equivalent into Emacs.  If it's in GNU
ELPA it's (virtually) in Emacs already anyway (we use the same rules for
the two, specifically so we can easily move code from one to the other).

> Unless it has changed (or is no longer a major factor), separating the code
> from Company won't be particularly valuable.

My interest is in making Company into nothing more than an alternative
UI.  All the backends would be separate and usable as much by Company as
by completion-at-point.

Most of it (UI and backends) should also get integrated into Emacs.

> Clang specifically? That's why I suggested another minor mode.

Yes, ultimately clang-completion should be a separate package enabled
separately.  In any case I don't think any of those issues are serious
enough to be a reason not to make the clang backend work via CAPF.

>> But moving it to CAPF means that it becomes useful/usable not only for
>> Company for also for good ol' competion-at-point.
> Would a Company user benefit from this, really?

Wrong question: the benefit would be for non-Company users.

> As long as (add-hook 'completion-at-point-function 'company-capf-clang) is
> only done when company-mode is enabled, there's really not much benefit.

Indeed, that's why it should also be done/doable when Company is not
being used.


        Stefan