Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add commands to navigate by groups. Add cycling to commands. #588

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 5, 2022
Merged

Add commands to navigate by groups. Add cycling to commands. #588

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 5, 2022

Conversation

okamsn
Copy link
Contributor

@okamsn okamsn commented Mar 2, 2022

@okamsn okamsn force-pushed the cycle-and-group-nav branch from fc59820 to 4fa10ec Compare March 2, 2022 02:01
This was referenced Mar 2, 2022
Closed
Closed
@okamsn okamsn force-pushed the cycle-and-group-nav branch 2 times, most recently from e5d4279 to 2255ca6 Compare March 2, 2022 02:08
@okamsn
Copy link
Contributor Author

okamsn commented Mar 3, 2022

@minad In the Selectrum README, the comparison with Vertico has the sentence

On the other hand, Vertico additionally supports cycling over candidates and provides more commands for grouping support.

Since you are more familiar with Vertico and Selectrum than I am, I ask whether you are content with removing this sentence in this PR or if you would like to see it changed. Do you have any thoughts/preferences on this?

@okamsn okamsn force-pushed the cycle-and-group-nav branch from 2255ca6 to dc6fac4 Compare March 3, 2022 03:55
@minad
Copy link
Contributor

minad commented Mar 3, 2022 •
edited
Loading

@okamsn Yes, it makes sense to update the Vertico/Selectrum comparison. Note that Vertico has changed a lot recently, so removing that sentence will not lead to a description which correctly reflects the status quo. So maybe updating the description should be done in a separate PR. Vertico acquired many more features due to its extensions. The main issue with Selectrum is that it doesn't implement support for dynamic completion tables correctly and has multiple other compatibility issues (#114, #481, #532). This was the main reason why I started to experiment with a new implementation, which then turned into Vertico. See also https://github.com/minad/vertico/#alternatives. (EDIT: For more background see also the thread in #532, where we discussed about dynamic completion tables and I started with a prototype implementation originally called minicomp.)

@okamsn okamsn force-pushed the cycle-and-group-nav branch from dc6fac4 to af1a312 Compare March 5, 2022 21:38
@okamsn
Add commands to navigate by groups. Add cycling to commands.
f819e26 
- Add option `selectrum-cycle-movement`.  When enabled, navigation
  commands wrap around.  Requested in radian-software#570.
- Add commands to navigate by groups (with optional cycling):
  `selectrum-next-group` and `selectrum-previous-group`.
  Requested in radian-software#554.
- Edit README.md:
  - List the new group commands.
- Update CHANGELOG.md.
@okamsn okamsn force-pushed the cycle-and-group-nav branch from af1a312 to f819e26 Compare March 5, 2022 21:40
@okamsn okamsn merged commit b1774da into radian-software:master Mar 5, 2022
@okamsn okamsn mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2022
Open
@okamsn
Copy link
Contributor Author

okamsn commented Mar 5, 2022

OK, I've left the comparison unchanged in this PR and created issue #589.

@okamsn okamsn deleted the cycle-and-group-nav branch March 5, 2022 21:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@okamsn @minad