[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Automatic completion mode
From:       "Andrew Dorrell" <andrew.dorrell () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-11-16 1:21:45
Message-ID: a0ed4dea0811151721u1a9963cr2d8183739e3c8db9 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

2008/11/16 Ingo Klöcker <kloecker@kde.org>:
> On Saturday 15 November 2008, Rafael Fernández López wrote:
>> I will describe the problem now. Imagine on a lineedit that i want
>> automatic completion (like krunner one) I write something like:
>>
>> "websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdelibs/kdeui/itemviews" and press enter.
>>
>> the lineedit now has saved that path. Good.
>>
>> Now I open krunner again and write
>>
>> "websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdelibs" and press enter.
>>
>> Surprisingly for me
>> "websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdelibs/kdeui/itemviews" is opened, what is
>> wrong from my POV.
>
> This is really specific to URLs (or paths). If I want to start Konsole
> via krunner then I usually write "kons" and then press Enter. I like
> this behavior and it's what I (and all other users) have learned to
> expect from the automatic completion mode.

Actually its wrong from my POV also and I'm a KDE user since 2.X.
Autocompletion is bad when it anticipates what you want and doesn't
provide an obvious way of using a shorter completion without full
typing.  It is more frustrating than not having auto completion in
this case!

To me being able to type "kon<enter>" is not an issue so please don't
include me as one of "all other users".  I don't like that behaviour
personally and I'm glad this issue is being discussed.

> Neither. Use "Dropdown list" completion mode if automatic completion
> mode does not suit you. Or invent yet another completion mode. But
> changing the behavior of an existing completion mode is IMO out of
> question.

I also don't favour "out of the question" as an answer.  If there is a
good reason that makes it out of the question then fine - state it.
But "I'm used to it" is *not* a good reason IMHO.  Especially as this
is an issue of usability.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]