Hi On Wed, 23 Oct 2013, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote: > Quoth Mark Walters on Oct 22 at 10:43 pm: >> This looks good to me +1. It makes the code clearer and nicer to read as >> well as giving a better user experience, and it is makes fixing the long >> standing tagging races simpler. >> >> I have a couple of docstring comments: >> >> In patch 2 perhaps notmuch-tag-completions could have a docstring. > > Added. I noticed that I had failed to update the call from > `notmuch-select-tag-with-completion', so I fixed that, too. I don't > understand why we take lists of search terms in random places and > never use more than one element, but I suppose this series doesn't > make that any worse. As far as I can see, at the end of the series, notmuch-tag-completions is only called with no argument: i.e., it's always just finding the list of all tags. This is because notmuch-select-tag-with-completion is only called once from "notmuch-search-filter-by-tag" with no search-terms argument. So it might be nice to just remove the search-terms completely. (The only downside is we might break user lisp.) Best wishes Mark >> In Patch 4 I think the docstring for notmuch-search-tag is outdated: it >> is "Change tags for the currently selected thread or region." but >> beg and end can now be specified by the caller. > > I've left the first sentence as it is, since it's good interactive > documentation and a typical way to describe functions even if they > take a region as arguments (see, for example, `kill-region'). But > I've elaborated the rest of the docstring to be clearer about this. > >> and one actual comment: >> >> in patch 3 (for show) delete-dups is called before the list is passed to >> notmuch-read-tag-changes whereas it is not for search or pick. >> Obviously this is not actually a problem but it might be worth being >> consistent. > > Ah, whoops. I'd done this before I decided to handle duplicates in > `notmuch-read-tag-changes'. Since it's redundant, I've removed it. > >> But that was all I found. All tests pass and everything I try behaves >> exactly as expected. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Mark >> >> >> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote: >> > This series improves tag change completion in various ways for >> > commands like +, -, and *. >> > >> > From a user perspective, this provides command-specific prompts like >> > "Tag message" and "Tag all" instead of the generic "Tag" prompt, and >> > bases tag removal completions on the tags that are in the buffer, >> > rather than the current tags in the database, providing a more >> > predicable experience. >> > >> > From an implementation perspective, this new tag removal completion >> > behavior improves efficiency and eliminates a road block to fixing the >> > tagging race bug (which otherwise results in massive queries just to >> > compute removal completions). The new code is also more "Elispy" and >> > predictable because all tag change prompting now occurs at the >> > interactive entry points, rather than buried under several layers of >> > non-interactive calls. >> > >> > This is a spiritual successor to >> > id:1354263691-19715-1-git-send-email-markwalters1009@gmail.com, though >> > it takes a very different approach. This is also a prerequisite to >> > the tag race fix in >> > id:1381185201-25197-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu and I plan to >> > send an updated version of that series when this one is accepted. >> > >> > Patches 1, 5, and 6 could be pushed on their own. They fix bugs or >> > sort of bugs that get in the way of the rest of the series.