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#23426: 25.0.93; dired-do-find-regexp doesn't find newline Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 13:09:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6f8f0880-95ea-4a8c-a193-8d7781a67375@default> References: <3ba077a2-21e0-9799-4f8b-c07bd1623853@yandex.ru>>> <6a4860bb-2b39-4da4-b2a7-7b8d15211fee@default>>> <831t5hkg6x.fsf@gnu.org>>> <7da95e19-50ff-4ca5-a5b8-2a7f65c2a7cd@default>> <83oa8liz53.fsf@gnu.org>> <9565500b-a35d-4de1-922d-c0131ff35ff8@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1462392654 25948 80.91.229.3 (4 May 2016 20:10:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 20:10:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 23426@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru, heinz@h-rommerskirchen.de, kaushal.modi@gmail.com To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 04 22:10:40 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 1ay383-0008MY-La for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 22:10:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49967 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay37z-0004Fv-Sj for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:10:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44575) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay37q-000422-FH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:10:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay37V-0001Bo-Cs for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:10:20 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:54184) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ay37V-00019k-9o for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:10:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ay37R-0006SH-Re for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:10:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 20:10:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23426 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 23426-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B23426.146239255724756 (code B ref 23426); Wed, 04 May 2016 20:10:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 23426) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 May 2016 20:09:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38288 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ay36j-0006RE-BD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:09:17 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:34671) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ay36h-0006Qz-Kl for 23426@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 16:09:16 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u44K99Nw009006 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 4 May 2016 20:09:09 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u44K98N5016913 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 4 May 2016 20:09:09 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0019.oracle.com (abhmp0019.oracle.com [141.146.116.25]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u44K976M025480; Wed, 4 May 2016 20:09:07 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:117799 Archived-At: > I think all of this is happening in an attempt to re-establish consistenc= y > among usage patterns, keybindings, and other features, so that the old ta= g > lookup functionality can be entirely replaced by the new xref > functionality. >=20 > Could it all have happened differently? Sure; but as Eli and Dmitry have > said, that ship has sailed. It happened under a different maintainer, > and so now we have to accept what it is and work toward the best solution= =20 > using this technology. It's that, or rip it all out altogether, which > Eli assures me would be an unfortunate loss of time, energy, and some > very nice improvements. It's not clear to me why you are saying this. I certainly have not requested any ripping out of anything - altogether or otherwise. I have not said anything negative about this technology - no complaints. I asked only that `A' and `Q' be left bound to their commands (which are still available). As I said, if those bindings were not being co-opted immediately then I would have had nothing to say here. I've heard no reason why different bindings, instead, are not given to the new search and search-and-replace features, at least as long as the original commands are supported. No reason, that is, beyond the statement that the ultimate aim is to replace the older commands. And even if `A' and `Q' were to be co-opted, if the new commands worked for all users of the old, I would no doubt have said nothing. I spoke up here when I guessed that some users of `A' and `Q' today would be unable to use them tomorrow, without installing some non-Emacs software. I spoke up to ask whether my guess was correct (yes). And apparently I was not the only one to whom this was news. If the older commands are to be replaced, and not just supplemented, by the new ones, then I do think this is a step backward for someone who does not have `grep' or `find' (I have both, so this is not a problem for me personally). That's my opinion, and it does not imply or call for ripping out anything. If the older commands are kept available and the new commands are given different key bindings, I see no problem at all. I have nothing against the addition of commands that use `grep' and `find' and show you all search hits. Quite the contrary. As I said clearly, I _welcome_ such an approach. To which explicit welcome the response was a sarcastic "That's very generous of you." Is it possible to welcome the new commands but point out disagreement with their being assigned the keys `A' and `Q'? If this is all about "an attempt to re-establish consistency among usage patterns, keybindings, and other features" then I do not see the imperative of assigning `A' and `Q' immediately to these new search commands.