OK then.

Cheers,
P.C.

2011/3/29 Hendrik Tews <t...@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>:
> Pierre Courtieu <pierre.court...@cnam.fr> writes:
>
>   I agree with the idea, but should we really modify
>   completion-ignored-extensions by ourselves?
>
> That's the usual practice. Here emacs -q -no-site-file gives
>
>    completion-ignored-extensions is a variable defined in `C source code'.
>    Its value is
>    (".o" "~" ".bin" ".lbin" ".so" ".a" ".ln" ".blg" ".bbl"
>    ".elc" ".lof" ".glo" ".idx" ".lot" ".svn/" ".hg/" ".git/"
>    ".bzr/" "CVS/" "_darcs/" "_MTN/" ".fmt" ".tfm" ".class"
>    ".fas" ".lib" ".mem" ".x86f" ".sparcf" ".fasl" ".ufsl" ".fsl"
>    ".dxl" ".pfsl" ".dfsl" ".p64fsl" ".d64fsl" ".dx64fsl" ".lo"
>    ".la" ".gmo" ".mo" ".toc" ".aux" ".cp" ".fn" ".ky" ".pg"
>    ".tp" ".vr" ".cps" ".fns" ".kys" ".pgs" ".tps" ".vrs" ".pyc"
>    ".pyo")
>
>   Is it not considered a
>   user preference? Some people dislike hiding files at all.
>
> Those people must then switch off the effects of
> completion-ignored-extensions on a different level, so they won't
> even notice if we add another two elements.
>
> Bye,
>
> Hendrik
> _______________________________________________
> ProofGeneral-devel mailing list
> ProofGeneral-devel@inf.ed.ac.uk
> http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/proofgeneral-devel
>
_______________________________________________
ProofGeneral-devel mailing list
ProofGeneral-devel@inf.ed.ac.uk
http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/proofgeneral-devel

Reply via email to