[ I'm sure Vin's already seen this, but other people may be interested in this. ] Vin Shelton <acs(a)xemacs.org&gt; wrote: Here's the original poster's (newer) solution. It doesn't appear to be any worse than the current code. Comments? -- Darryl Okahata darrylo(a)soco.agilent.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. From: "Mehul A. Shah" <mashah(a)cs.berkeley.edu&gt; Subject: XEmacs team -- fix for Completion list too wide problem Newsgroups: comp.emacs.xemacs Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:04:34 -0700 Organization: University of California at Berkeley Mehul Shah wrote: Ignore the hack above, here is a better solution. Okay, I have found a reasonable solution to the *Completion* list being too wide problem. Here is the quick fix, although I believe the code should be restructured so that the temporary buffer is displayed before its contents are formatted. This way, the code does not have to guess at what the width is of the window in which the temporary buffer is displayed. In list-mode.el previously, in the function display-completion-list, the width of the window was guessed with the following code: (frame-width (or (last-nonminibuf-frame) (selected-frame))) Basically, guessing that the width of the completion window would be the same as the width of the last selected frame or the width of the last non-minibuffer frame. Unfortunately, this is no the case when you split the frame vertically. So here is a better guess: (window-width (get-lru-window (last-nonminibuf-frame))) This basically gets the width of the least recently used window, which happens to be the window in which the temp buffer tends to get displayed in. I have not verified this fact in the code, but seems to work when I use it. So, in list-mode.el I simply replaced the previous guess with the new one and the formatting came out much better (both in cases where a new window is created for the temp buffer and one in which there is an available window for the temp buffer). Please let me know how I can tell the XEmacs team about this fix. Thanks, Mehul