On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 8:41 PM Arash Esbati <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hongyi Zhao <[email protected]> writes: > > > ### **Final Analysis** > > > > These tests definitively confirm that the "short-circuiting" problem > > is real and is caused by the aggressive behavior of the `lsp-capf` > > backend. > > > > Therefore, my final conclusion is now even stronger: > > > > For a complex, modern Emacs setup that includes `lsp-mode`, a > > **manual, key-bound command that completely bypasses the automatic > > `completion-at-point-functions` chain is the only robust and reliable > > solution** for file path completion. It is superior not only in > > **reliability** (it never gets short-circuited) but also in > > **functionality** (it provides richer, more user-friendly candidates > > than `lsp-mode`'s basic implementation). > > Glad you have this sorted out. I don't use `lsp-mode', so I can't say > anything about your conclusion. My only recommendation is to try out > the same with `eglot' and see if you get other and/or better results.
Thank you for your suggestion. Please also check here [1] for a comparison of several mainstream LSP clients in Emacs. BTW, based on the remarks here [1], I should give it a try on lsp-boosted [2] eglot & lsp-mode. > > Thank you again for your time and for guiding me toward this rigorous > > and illuminating investigation. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/1c0v28k/lspmode_vs_lspbridge_vs_lspce_vs_eglot/ [2] https://github.com/blahgeek/emacs-lsp-booster > > You're welcome. > > Best, Arash Regards, Zhao
