Re: Entering filenames with spaces

[David Reitter]

On 12 Aug 2005, at 18:50, Drew Adams wrote:

> > The point is that users are free to get rid of the SPC bindings to
> > minibuffer-complete-word. I think that David was saying that he
> > never uses word completion - in that case, just removing the
> > bindings suffices. Those who do use it have several options,
> > including the alternatives of binding it to something else (to use
> > SPC for inserting a space) and binding something
> > else to a command to insert a space. You could even do it one way for
> > file-name completion and the other way 'round for other completion...
>
>     I think that would make a lot of sense.
>
> Yes, but you then seem to argue against it (?):

You get me wrong: what makes a lot of sense is to do it "one way for  
file-name completion and the other 'round for other completion".

> Question: If you don't use word-completion anyway (you use only  
> TAB, not
> SPC, for completion, I believe), then why is the current situation  
> a problem
> for you? TAB will complete file names that contain spaces. Or are you
> referring only to creating a _new_ file that has spaces in its name?

Well, find-file starts a new file and you give it a name. Also, when  
you save the buffer, and it doesn't have a name yet (possible if  
buffer created in another way, with "new" in my own implementation),  
or when you "save" the buffer "as", you enter a file name.
Even when you want to enter a file name to load without using  
completion, you get inconsistent behavior: SPC behaves differently  
from 'a'. And it shouldn't.


> IMO, `find-file*' should use completion, and the spacebar should, by
> default, be bound to `minibuffer-word-complete'.

I respectfully agree for the UI reasons I mentioned before. Why not  
map 'x' to the completion function? After all, only a few file names  
have an 'x' in them!

> The new `create-file'
> command (or whatever it's called) could also use completion (to  
> help with
> creating files with similar names), but without binding SPC to
> minibuffer-complete-word.
>
> I just think that SPC is too convenient for completion to give it  
> up (by
> default) to space insertion. Our options include, in addition to  
> what I
> outlined earlier (and in order of increasing restrictiveness):
>
> 1. Remove SPC for word completion altogether.
> 2. Do so only for word completion of file names.
> 3. Do so only for word completion of file names for new file creation.
>
> I think you're arguing for #1 or (as a concession to others) #2.

I'm arguing for #2.

> Another
> possibility (similar to #3) is to remove word completion altogether  
> for file
> creation (only) via `create-file', leaving only TAB (`minibuffer- 
> complete').

So is find-file going to open only existing files from now on?

> There is lots that is unexpected or new in Emacs, and much of it is
> desirable because it optimizes ease of use - IOW, some Emacs UI  
> features are
> new to people, but they are good. It is better to help new users to  
> learn
> the Emacs way of doing things, _if it is better_, than to cater to  
> their
> inferior UI habits.

Sorry, but are you saying that entering a space with the space bar is  
an inferior UI habit?
Are you saying that consistency is an inferior UI habit too?


> The Emacs UI might seem odd, depending on what one is used to, but  
> that
> doesn't, by itself, mean that it is inferior.

I think that's too big a discussion to start. The Space bar is  
something so basic, you shouldn't redefine it, at least not by default.

> This is a general problem that occurs: If the Emacs way is  
> unexpected, but
> superior, we need to 1) teach it to users and encourage them to  
> adopt it,
> but also 2) tell them how to obtain the inferior UI behavior that  
> they may
> be used to.

Again, using Space to enter space characters can hardly be thought of  
as inferior. Similarly, using shorter key commands (one modifier, one  
key) to do stuff that I need often (like C-x C-f find-file, or save- 
buffer), and longer ones to do stuff that's less frequent (e.g. M-u  
upcase-word) is not inferior, but a smart move. Note that I'm not  
arguing to change these things now - we're creatures of habit, after  
all.

> If we keep the default completion behavior, then we should  
> definitely let
> users know how to insert a space (C-q SPC or, perhaps, C-SPC). This
> information should be up front, in the Info discussion of  
> completion. It
> could also be added to the *Completions* buffer header whenever SPC is
> typed - that way, a newbie who types SPC trying to insert it in a  
> file name
> will soon learn how to insert a space.

Jesus - more stuff to read for users.  Great.