From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22494: still can't search for two spaces Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:29:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6281db1e-d974-4cdc-b111-3e9097ae89db@default> References: <<<87h9hvshi3.fsf@jidanni.org>> <<> <<54a07b7d-1fbd-4ed1-a8a0-e22eb5787c97@default>> <<871t8yit11.fsf@mbork.pl>> <<77b5b6df-4889-4142-a04d-526dd94c3a48@default>> <> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454275828 11099 80.91.229.3 (31 Jan 2016 21:30:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22494@debbugs.gnu.org, mbork@mbork.pl, jidanni@jidanni.org To: rms@gnu.org, Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 31 22:30:14 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZT-0007oE-GK for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:30:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43340 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZS-0002lI-MG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56458) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZP-0002l3-QP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZK-0002lw-Q4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55270) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZK-0002lq-Mv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzZK-0006uR-IR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22494 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 22494-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22494.145427577926505 (code B ref 22494); Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22494) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Jan 2016 21:29:39 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43490 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzYx-0006tQ-0R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:29:39 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:26199) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aPzYu-0006tD-Qp for 22494@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:29:37 -0500 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u0VLTRCp011921 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:29:28 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0VLTRkJ021818 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:29:27 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0011.oracle.com (abhmp0011.oracle.com [141.146.116.17]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0VLTRua010850; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 21:29:27 GMT In-Reply-To: <> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:112161 Archived-At: > > It's not a clear indication that the user wants to return to > > lax whitespace matching. What if s?he deleted the second SPC > > and typed a TAB or other whitespace char? Or typed a SPC char > > again? Would you toggle back again? >=20 > Don't think if it as "toggling" but rather as heeding what is in > the search string. Heeding what is in the search string means nothing - or anything. What is in the search string is a search pattern. How it is interpreted is the question. Literal matching of whitespace chars is one such interpretation. I've already agreed that more than one whitespace char in a row is a reasonable indication that the user wants/expects whitespace chars to be matched literally. Why? Because with lax whitespace matching there is never any reason to type multiple, contiguous whitespace chars - it serves no purpose. (But see also what I wrote about pasting copied text that might contain multiple, contiguous whitespace chars.) What is not obvious is whether whitespace search should be changed away from literal matching just because there are not (no longer) multiple such chars in a row in the search pattern. That was the subject of the text you quoted.