No, i dpn't think so. They actually already differ substantially from
complete-symbol. In the first place, completion is done by
completion-at-point (which has no C-u variant); moreover,
geiser-repl--tab will indent or go to the next error (instead of
completing), depending on context.
It might be appropriate to change the name of `geiser-repl--tab' to
`geiser-repl-dwim-tab', given its three-features behavior (to be
expanded to four?).
Finally, the alternative behaviour of
complete-symbol is performing a lookup in the manual's index, which we
have already covered (sort of) by other Geiser commands and, IMHO,
was a
horrible choice for a C-u binding (it being a substantially different
function). If we deemed it useful to provide an "index lookup" command
(and here there's the problem of non-texinfo manuals), i would
strongly
prefer to give it an entirely different key binding, unrelated to
completion (it'd belong to the C-c C-d family).
Correction to my earlier message: I had been thinking that minor-mode
key bindings should be used, but this is "REPL (major) mode," not
"Scheme (major) mode with Geiser (minor) mode." So, the C-c plus
punctuation character would not be appropriate.
--
You err by thinking simplicity and elegance are mostly
cosmetic. Simplicity and elegance are overwhelmingly
practical virtues.
- William D Clinger, comp.lang.scheme
