RE: C-x C-f, Tab (in)completion and visiting the wrong, new files

[Drew Adams]

> > If you have a habit of hitting TAB RET, then you are, in
> > effect, expecting TAB to complete to a complete match, so
> > that RET will open the existing file whose name matches.
> > With that expectation, incomplete matches throw you off.
> > In that case, you want TAB to complete only against existing
> > files, no?  Then why not bind `file-file-existing'? That's what
> > it's for.
>
> `find-file-existing' doesn't actually affect TAB; it affects RET.  So it's
> true that it has a desirable effect on the dyad TAB RET, but it affects
> all other RETs too.  By having special consideration for RET only after
> TAB, we can change that dyad only.  That said, I have no strong opinion
> here; I just want the true distinctions between options recognized.

A useful clarification, and it speaks to David's point that he wants
confirmation only after completion, not in general. That is, he wants to be
able to open a new file with `C-x C-f', but not using TAB RET.

`buffer-auto-mode-alist' might respond to this need (use `C-x b' to create a
buffer for a file with a new name, and otherwise bind `C-x C-f' to
`find-file-existing'), but it would mean that users would need to customize
this.

Stefan's suggestion to allow an `only-after-completion' value for
`find-file-confirm-nonexistent' makes the most sense. I think that would
make everyone happy. (The default value of `find-file-confirm-nonexistent'
should remain, nil, however, IMO.)