[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior |
Date: |
Sun, 13 Mar 2022 20:48:22 +0000 |
> In case of no completions it will be formatted to: "0 possible
> completions".
Why? Why wouldn't *Completions* just be
removed? And "[No match]" is already echoed.
Sounds like things are getting more, not less,
complicated for users (maybe overengineering?).
Why would we ever say "0 possible completions"?
Why bother with "possible"? We never show
IMpossible completions, do we?
When there are no matches we just tell users
there's no match. Always have. Simple.
- Re: Question about completion behavior, (continued)
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/11
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Juri Linkov, 2022/03/12
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/13
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Juri Linkov, 2022/03/13
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/13
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/03/13
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/13
- RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior,
Drew Adams <=
- Re: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/13
- RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/03/13
- Re: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/13
- RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/03/13
- RE: [External] : Re: Question about completion behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/03/12
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/09
- [PATCH] Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/09
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/03/09
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/03/09
- Re: Question about completion behavior, Ergus, 2022/03/09