Re: Adding transient to Emacs core

[Jonas Bernoulli]

Madhu <enometh@meer.net> writes:

> [I apologize - I wasn't sensitized enough to your sensibilities.]

Thanks!

> I assume this is on the current `master' branch - and will be using
> this shortly.

I pushed it to transient's master a few months ago.  The version in
Emacs includes it as well.

> I understans that you say this has been addressed.

Correct.

> If you say that (pop-up-windows nil) is not a valid customization, I
> would strongly disagree with that.

I have addressed this by let-binding that variable to t around the call
to display-buffer.  There's just no way around that because transient's
buffer just has to be displayed somewhere other than the selected
window. (Of course you can display it int another frame instead of in
another window of the same frame, but then this binding should cause no
offense, because in this scenario has no effect.)

[I haven't pushed that to Emacs yet, but you can find it on transient's
own master branch.]

> If transient cannot handle input for some configuration then there
> should be a fallback to emacs mechanisms that *can* handle input.

I consider the above binding to be such a fallback.

> If the package does not support use display-buffer according to the
> design of display-buffer, I maintain it will have a negative impact if
> adopted in the core and one is constrained to use it (instead of
> keeping it optional)

You can (setq transient-show-popup nil) to get this behavior: "If nil,
then do not show the popup unless the user explicitly requests it, by
pressing an incomplete prefix key sequence."

Hm, you probably don't like that "an incomplete prefix key sequence"
triggers the popup to be shown still.  I might implement a "never"
variant that never ever shows bindings the way transient was designed to
do it, but instead makes `describe-bindings` available.  That would add
a feel to it that is very similar to that of regular prefix commands.