[Geany] autocomplete terminology confusion

[Enrico Tröger]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:01:47 +0200, kib2 <kib2 at free.fr> wrote:

> Enrico Tröger a écrit :
> > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 12:54:03 -0400, "John Gabriele"
> > <jmg3000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> On 10/20/07, Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger at uvena.de> wrote:
> >>     
> >>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:44:01 -0400, "John Gabriele"
> >>> <jmg3000 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>       
> >>>> On 10/19/07, Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger at uvena.de> wrote:
> >>>>         
> >>>>> So my suggestion is to rename the current construct completion
> >>>>> completely to e.g. "code snippets" or something else.
> >>>>>           
> >>>> My guess is that lots of folks will use them for things other
> >>>> than code, so maybe just "snippets" would do; as in, "Hit Tab to
> >>>> activate the snippet for the preceeding bit of text". Then you'd
> >>>> find yourself referring to "filetype-specific snippets" for those
> >>>> different sections in the config file.
> >>>>         
> >>> But why not? IMO it fits the actual behaviour more than auto
> >>> completion.
> >>>       
> >> The actual behaviour is, of course, to expand a small piece of text
> >> into a larger piece -- regardless of whether or not it's code. So,
> >> really, neither "code snippets" nor "snippets" are names that fit
> >> actual behaviour. I just thought "snippets" would be simpler, and
> >> more general sounding.
> >>     
> > Why doesn't fit snippets at all?
> > I think it is good enough and I'm not really sure about your last
> > sentence. You also suggest snippets or you are against? To me it
> > sounds a bit contrary.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Enrico
> >
> >   
> Hi,
> 
> Snippets have a different meaning for me :
> those of a TextMate like editor (InType, eTexteditor,Smultron,...),
> with fields where you can give default values, apply transforms and
> pos your cursor at the end.
> Type 'snippets' + Vim or Emacs, and you'll find these features too.
> So this term seems commonly used for pieces of text with dynamic 
> replacements; that's not Geany behavior.
If I understand you right, you are talking about that what we call
templates in Geany.
So, any better idea for the current auto completion feature? I don't
want to rename the template feature because IMO it fits very well and
is there already for a very long time.


Regards,
Enrico

-- 
Get my GPG key from http://www.uvena.de/pub.key
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20071023/4c0dd5ca/attachment.pgp>