Hi,
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Rasmus writes:
>
>> I agree. It's confusing how the docstring and the λ is written, but it's
>> just a "front-end" for completing-read. A reference to completing-read
>> should be added to the docstring.
>
> Isn't it already the case?
I don't know. I have been
Hello,
Rasmus writes:
> I agree. It's confusing how the docstring and the λ is written, but it's
> just a "front-end" for completing-read. A reference to completing-read
> should be added to the docstring.
Isn't it already the case?
> That was my "feeling" about org-icompleting-read as well
Hi,
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Oleh Krehel writes:
>
>> The current `org-icompleting-read' is defined as taking only `&rest
>> args', which can be as many as 8, all of them without a name.
>>
>> I propose to update the definition to:
>>
>> (cl-defun org-icompleting-read (prompt collection
>>
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Moreover,
> `org-icompleting-read' is not harder to read as `completing-read'
> anyway.
I disagree on this. `completing-read' at least declares its own argument
list. So it's possible to distinguish which argument is which, albeit
with some effort for a large amount of
Hello,
Oleh Krehel writes:
> The current `org-icompleting-read' is defined as taking only `&rest
> args', which can be as many as 8, all of them without a name.
>
> I propose to update the definition to:
>
> (cl-defun org-icompleting-read (prompt collection
>
Hi all,
The current `org-icompleting-read' is defined as taking only `&rest
args', which can be as many as 8, all of them without a name.
I propose to update the definition to:
(cl-defun org-icompleting-read (prompt collection
&key predicate require-match
