Message: 15
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:03:01 +0100
From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Smarter M-x that filters on major-mode
Message-ID: <87r1lmjul6.fsf@telefonica.net" target="_blank">87r1lmjul6.fsf@telefonica.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
<tomas@tuxteam.de> writes:
> Nobody uses M-x in an explorative way?
>
> IMO this is a bad idea for discoverability. What is (and what is not)
> relevant to a mode is necessarily subject to a judgement call by
> someone.
>
> Some thought needs to go into how give users a way to escape that
> confinement, I think.
I do use M-x in an explorative way all the time. I was the proponent of
the M-x filter when this was discussed a few years ago.
I don't want to see a zillion of irrelevant commands when I'm fishing
for interesting things on a given context.
This is about leaving out commands which only make sense when certain
minor or major mode is active. I can't see how this would hamper
learning by exploration.
There has to be a middle way... Sometimes. when I'm hacking on Emacs Lisp, I need to remember the exact
name of a function (for another major mode) and the unfiltered M-x is a nice way of doing that.
You know the approx name and
M-x <what you remember>-TAB
is a quick and convenient way of finding out... Although <f1>-f is an alternative, my fingers yearn for M-x.
Maybe I'll need to "reprogram them" ;-) but I'd better not
Best, /PA