title: Can Omnicomplete in Vim for python/3 complete function names or just methods?
body: <p>To illustrate my question, here is a simple example of how Omnicomplete is acting on my machine:</p>
  
  <pre><code>name = "Bob"
  na&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;      gives-----&gt; name
  name.&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;   gives-----&gt; (correct dropdown menu of methods for string)
  prin&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;    gives-----&gt; (-- Omni completion (^O^N^P) Pattern not found)
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>I was expecting the last line to expand to <code>print</code> or <code>print(</code> or something like that. Is this the correct behavior (Omnicomplete only does method completion for python/3)? If so, would function completion in the last case above be an example of what snippets are for?</p>
  
  <p>I am using MacVim in the terminal with tmux. My <code>:version</code> says VIM 8.0. I have <code>+python/dyn</code> and <code>+python3/dyn</code> features. My <code>~/.vimrc</code> has this line (among others): </p>
  
  <pre><code>autocmd FileType python set omnifunc=python3complete#Complete
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>Right now, I'm only editing python3 files, so I <em>think</em> <code>omnifunc=python3...</code> is okay.</p>
  
  <p>Semi-related SO post: <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7271129/problem-with-vim-omnicomplete-and-system-python">Problem with Vim omnicomplete and system Python</a></p>
  
  <p><strong>EDIT:</strong> I may have a workaround, though I don't know how to implement it.</p>
  
  <p>Observe that:</p>
  
  <pre><code> import builtins
   builtins.pr&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;   gives-----&gt; (dropdown menu with print() and property()    )
   builtins.pri&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;  gives-----&gt; (autocompletes to builtins.print(             )
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>Can this action with <code>&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;</code> be replicated without writing <code>import builtins</code> and using a <code>builtins</code> object? Perhaps a <code>&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;</code> search assumes <code>builtins.</code> if the string preceding <code>&lt;C-x&gt;&lt;C-o&gt;</code> has no <code>.</code> in it?</p>
  
  <p>I'm all ears for any suggestions.</p>