completing read

[Dan Gerson <DanG at SCRC-TENEX>]

I think that <return> should not complete; if I want completion, I can type
<altmode>, or <end> depending upon what I want to do.

An example of how <return> currently screws users is if they want to
create a new buffer with a name which may be completed to an existing
name.  Say I want a buffer named "B", not BUFFER-n.  After I blew up
MMcM told me I could type c-<return>.  Now, c-<return> isn't documented
in any of the usual places, neither from the help message for completing
read, nor from Describe Command, since c-<return> is
COM-COMPLETE-AND-EXIT just the same as <return>. COM-COMPLETE-AND-EXIT
does a special check to see if the control bit was set.  Bletch.

Isn't it more consistant for <return> to mean exit, <end> to mean complete
and exit if unique, and <altmode> to mean complete?