Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b0e318d 2/2: Score flex-style completions according to match tightness

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 16.03.2019 15:19, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > It adds them in the hope that they would be useful in the near future.
> > When I added this bit, I thought it would be a matter of days until we
> > found a suitable place for a sorting function to use those properties.
> > But it's been two months and a decision hasn't yet been reached.
>
> Actually, I think we did reach a consensus, but I haven't gotten to
> writing the code yet.

Agreed.

> > Regardless of the decision of where to put sorting function based
> > on flex scores, completion-pcm--... is a most suitable place to add the
> > scoring, since this is where the string is propertized (and the scoring
> > is closely related to that.
>
> Also, I think the scoring would be valuable for `partial-completion` and
> `initialism` styles as well (i.e. for all users of PCM).
Shouldn't flex-score-match-tightness be renamed, then? So it doesn't 
leave an impression of being specific to just one completion style.

The first line of its docstring also seems misleading.

Further, purely theoretically, I'm a bit concerned that if we include 
scoring at this level, in the common function, it would be harder to 
tweak for each individual completion style. But that can be changed 
later if we so choose, of course.