* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity @ 2013-06-27 9:58 Dani Moncayo 2013-06-27 23:44 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-27 9:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 14729 Recipe from "emacs -Q": M-< b u f C-s C-s f e r After that, the echo area indicates that, in the current Isearch, I'm looking for "buffer", and I've found the "buf" part, but not the remaining "fer". That makes no sense, because that cannot happen in the current buffer, where every instance of "buf" is followed by a "fer". In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32) of 2013-06-24 on LEG570 Bzr revision: 113160 larsi@gnus.org-20130624174222-cndqc1pdsew2la60 Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601 Configured using: `configure --prefix=/c/usr --enable-checking CFLAGS='-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS='-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1 -I/c/usr/include'' -- Dani Moncayo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-27 9:58 bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-27 23:44 ` Juri Linkov 2013-06-29 17:22 ` Dani Moncayo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2013-06-27 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dani Moncayo; +Cc: 14729 > Recipe from "emacs -Q": > M-< b u f C-s C-s f e r I guess this key sequence should be rather: M-< C-s b u f C-s C-s f e r Is this what you meant? > After that, the echo area indicates that, in the current Isearch, I'm > looking for "buffer", and I've found the "buf" part, but not the > remaining "fer". > > That makes no sense, because that cannot happen in the current buffer, > where every instance of "buf" is followed by a "fer". This is an interesting state of the search. The search is failed, so it assumes that adding more characters to the failed search should leave the search in the failed state. Isn't this logically correct? What do you expect it to do in this case? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-27 23:44 ` Juri Linkov @ 2013-06-29 17:22 ` Dani Moncayo 2013-06-29 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-29 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729 On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> wrote: >> Recipe from "emacs -Q": >> M-< b u f C-s C-s f e r > > I guess this key sequence should be rather: > > M-< C-s b u f C-s C-s f e r > > Is this what you meant? Yes, of course. Silly mistake on my part. >> After that, the echo area indicates that, in the current Isearch, I'm >> looking for "buffer", and I've found the "buf" part, but not the >> remaining "fer". >> >> That makes no sense, because that cannot happen in the current buffer, >> where every instance of "buf" is followed by a "fer". > > This is an interesting state of the search. The search is failed, > so it assumes that adding more characters to the failed search should > leave the search in the failed state. Isn't this logically correct? Of course it is correct. If there is not match for FOO, obviously there will be no match for FOOBAR. > What do you expect it to do in this case? I expect that the fontification of the echo area reflects what is happening: that the whole search string ("buffer") is unmatched (not only the last "fer"), since the current search begins just after the last instance of "buf" in the buffer [1], and there is no match (neither full nor partial) of the current search string between that location and the end of the buffer. ------------ [1] Think of "C-s" within an Isearch session as "repeat the current search, but starting at the current point location". -- Dani Moncayo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-29 17:22 ` Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-29 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 2013-06-29 22:34 ` Dani Moncayo 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2013-06-29 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dani Moncayo; +Cc: 14729 > I expect that the fontification of the echo area reflects what is > happening: that the whole search string ("buffer") is unmatched (not > only the last "fer"), since the current search begins just after the > last instance of "buf" in the buffer [1], and there is no match > (neither full nor partial) of the current search string between that > location and the end of the buffer. `isearch-fail-pos' assumes that in a failed state of search a shorter previous successful search string should be taken as a basis for highlighting. In this case, the last successful match was "buf", so an appended suffix is highlighted as failed. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-29 21:53 ` Juri Linkov @ 2013-06-29 22:34 ` Dani Moncayo 2013-06-30 3:11 ` Drew Adams 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-29 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729 On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> wrote: >> I expect that the fontification of the echo area reflects what is >> happening: that the whole search string ("buffer") is unmatched (not >> only the last "fer"), since the current search begins just after the >> last instance of "buf" in the buffer [1], and there is no match >> (neither full nor partial) of the current search string between that >> location and the end of the buffer. > > `isearch-fail-pos' assumes that in a failed state of search > a shorter previous successful search string should be taken > as a basis for highlighting. In this case, the last successful match > was "buf", so an appended suffix is highlighted as failed. Then the mistake is not re-setting that "last successful match" after each "C-s", because here, the last successful match was "buf" only after doing "M-< C-s buf" and also after the subsequent "C-s", but once you type the third "C-s", the whole search string ("buf") is unmatched (because the search now begins at [1]), and that fact (fully unmatched search string) cannot change by appending more characters to the search string. IOW: After the third "C-s", the search goes from [1] to the end of the buffer, and therefore any search string starting with a character different from "f", "e", "r", "." or whitespace will be fully unmatched, and should be highlighted as such in the echo area. ----------------------- [1] Position between "buf" and "fer" in the last instance of the string "buffer". -- Dani Moncayo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-29 22:34 ` Dani Moncayo @ 2013-06-30 3:11 ` Drew Adams 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2013-06-30 3:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dani Moncayo, Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729 (There may be another way to approach this. This is what I have to offer.) On way of looking at this has to do with the behavior of `isearch-printing-char'. If you change it to add the following `while' sexp then the reported problem disappears: (defun isearch-printing-char (&optional char count) "Append ordinary printing CHAR to the search string and search. With a numeric prefix arg, append that many copies of CHAR." (interactive (list last-command-event (prefix-numeric-value current-prefix-arg))) ;; ADDED THIS `while'. (while (or (not isearch-success) isearch-error) (isearch-pop-state)) (let ((char (or char last-command-event))) (when (= char ?\S-\ ) (setq char ?\ )) (if current-input-method (isearch-process-search-multibyte-characters char count) (isearch-process-search-char char count)))) However, that also changes the behavior in general, in this way: Whenever there is a mismatch and you type something, what you type replaces the mismatched part. That is probably not the behavior we want, in general. It might be the behavior some people want in general or the behavior that anyone might want some of the time. FWIW, in Isearch+ the above `while' is conditional on the value of a user option, `isearchp-drop-mismatch'. Only when the option value is `replace-last' is the `while' evaluated and thus the state popped. There are 3 possible values for the option. Because you might sometimes want different behavior, you can cycle among the values during Isearch using `M-k' (command `isearchp-cycle-mismatch-removal'). The values: nil - Your current input is appended to the search string, even if the string already has a mismatched portion. `replace-last' - Your current input replaces the last mismatched text. You can always see your last input, even if it is a mismatch. And it is available for editing using `M-e' (which puts point at the mismatch position). anything else - Your current input is ignored for searching if it causes a mismatch: it is, in effect, not added to the search string, which thus always has only successful matches. The default value is nil, which gives the same behavior as vanilla Isearch (including the behavior that you reported): When the search does not match and you type more text it is simply appended, even though it does not help with matching (but in the case of a regexp, it might). Value `replace-last' automatically replaces the mismatched portion by what you type. This also has the effect of fixing the scenario you describe. E.g., if you type `bufx' then the `x' is a mismatch for `buffer'. If you then type `m', the `m' replaces the `x' (`bufm'), and the `m' is now the mismatched portion. If you then type `f' then the match is extended to `buff' (there is no longer a mismatch). Any other option value means you never see a mismatch in the search string. Anything you type that does not match is dropped, as if you hadn't typed it. As I say, there might well be another way to give you the behavior you expect/prefer here. The `replace-last' approach is really designed for something other than your scenario. It just happens to take care of this case because what would be a (mistakenly) highlighted `f' is immediately replaced by an unhighlighted `f' (you never see it highlighted). Presumably there is a way to prevent Isearch from recognizing the reported scenario as a mismatch, rather than applying `replace-last' as a bandaid. Perhaps Juri has an idea. He is more familiar with the new Isearch state structure etc. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2013-06-29 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 2013-06-29 22:34 ` Dani Moncayo @ 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-04 16:48 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams 2021-12-04 19:59 ` Juri Linkov 1 sibling, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-04 3:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 316 bytes --] Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes: > `isearch-fail-pos' assumes that in a failed state of search > a shorter previous successful search string should be taken > as a basis for highlighting. In this case, the last successful match > was "buf", so an appended suffix is highlighted as failed. So, first we have: [-- Attachment #2: Type: image/png, Size: 6050 bytes --] [-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 36 bytes --] Then we type "fer", and then get: [-- Attachment #4: Type: image/png, Size: 10937 bytes --] [-- Attachment #5: Type: text/plain, Size: 37 bytes --] But... I think I'd expect getting [-- Attachment #6: Type: image/png, Size: 7103 bytes --] [-- Attachment #7: Type: text/plain, Size: 125 bytes --] instead? Probably. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: [External] : bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-04 16:48 ` Drew Adams 2021-12-04 19:59 ` Juri Linkov 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2021-12-04 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen, Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729@debbugs.gnu.org, Dani Moncayo Please read what I wrote in the thread, if you haven't already: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=14729#20 There are different use cases and expected/preferred behaviors. What Isearch+ does lets users specify their overall preference, and it lets them change the behavior on the fly (during Isearch). Vanilla Emacs could provide similar flexibility. (Or it can just hard-code one such behavior, as it does now.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-04 16:48 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams @ 2021-12-04 19:59 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-04 22:06 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-04 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo >> `isearch-fail-pos' assumes that in a failed state of search >> a shorter previous successful search string should be taken >> as a basis for highlighting. In this case, the last successful match >> was "buf", so an appended suffix is highlighted as failed. > > So, first we have: > > > > > Then we type "fer", and then get: > > > > > But... I think I'd expect getting > > > > > instead? Probably. Or to turn the failing search into a successful one since the search string matches the buffer. OTOH, the current behavior also makes sense since it highlights the last failing characters typed by the user. E.g. compare it with `C-s bufzzz'. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-04 19:59 ` Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-04 22:06 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-05 9:35 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-06 17:03 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-04 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes: > Or to turn the failing search into a successful one > since the search string matches the buffer. But we've skipped past the final match, so I think it's correct to still say that we've skipped past, even if we add more characters. Probably. > OTOH, the current behavior also makes sense > since it highlights the last failing characters > typed by the user. E.g. compare it with `C-s bufzzz'. Hm... yes... but it does seem wrong (in one way or another) in the original test case. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-04 22:06 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-05 9:35 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-05 20:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 17:03 ` Juri Linkov 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-05 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo >> Or to turn the failing search into a successful one >> since the search string matches the buffer. > > But we've skipped past the final match, Actually, the final match is not skipped - point is still on the final match. That error is just an intermediate step before wrapping. > so I think it's correct to still say that we've skipped past, even if > we add more characters. Probably. When the users type more characters on the wrapping search, isn't this an indication that the users changed their mind and decided to continue searching for more text? >> OTOH, the current behavior also makes sense >> since it highlights the last failing characters >> typed by the user. E.g. compare it with `C-s bufzzz'. > > Hm... yes... but it does seem wrong (in one way or another) in the > original test case. Honestly, I have no idea what is right and what is wrong in this situation 🤐 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-05 9:35 ` Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-05 20:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 2:09 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-05 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes: >> so I think it's correct to still say that we've skipped past, even if >> we add more characters. Probably. > > When the users type more characters on the wrapping search, > isn't this an indication that the users changed their mind > and decided to continue searching for more text? Or... perhaps they're building up the string for their next (wrapped) `C-s'. 😀 > Honestly, I have no idea what is right and what is wrong in this situation 🤐 Me neither, but it's not quite optimal the way it is now. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: [External] : bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-05 20:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-06 2:09 ` Drew Adams 2021-12-06 9:33 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2021-12-06 2:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen, Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729@debbugs.gnu.org, Dani Moncayo > > Honestly, I have no idea what is right and what > > is wrong in this situation > > Me neither, but it's not quite optimal the way it is now. That exchange is telling. As I suggested, let users control the behavior (Isearch+ does that). Don't look for a single behavior that's "right" for everyone in all contexts. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: [External] : bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-06 2:09 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams @ 2021-12-06 9:33 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-06 9:40 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 16:01 ` Drew Adams 0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-06 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Drew Adams; +Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen, 14729@debbugs.gnu.org, Dani Moncayo >> > Honestly, I have no idea what is right and what >> > is wrong in this situation >> >> Me neither, but it's not quite optimal the way it is now. > > That exchange is telling. > > As I suggested, let users control the behavior > (Isearch+ does that). Don't look for a single > behavior that's "right" for everyone in all > contexts. This means adding a new user option for this small detail? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: [External] : bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-06 9:33 ` Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-06 9:40 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 16:01 ` Drew Adams 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-06 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729@debbugs.gnu.org, Dani Moncayo Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes: > This means adding a new user option for this small detail? Nope. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: [External] : bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-06 9:33 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-06 9:40 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-06 16:01 ` Drew Adams 1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Drew Adams @ 2021-12-06 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen, 14729@debbugs.gnu.org, Dani Moncayo > >> > Honestly, I have no idea what is right and what > >> > is wrong in this situation > >> > >> Me neither, but it's not quite optimal the way it is now. > > > > That exchange is telling. > > > > As I suggested, let users control the behavior > > (Isearch+ does that). Don't look for a single > > behavior that's "right" for everyone in all > > contexts. > > This means adding a new user option for this small detail? I described what I do in Isearch+. There's a user option, AND users can choose/change the current behavior on the fly, during Isearch. There are of course other ways to skin this cat. My point above was that you seem to have come to the (correct) conclusion that one size doesn't fit all. How you want to go forward from that conclusion is TBD. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-04 22:06 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-05 9:35 ` Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-06 17:03 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-07 20:48 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-06 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 589 bytes --] >> Or to turn the failing search into a successful one >> since the search string matches the buffer. > > But we've skipped past the final match, so I think it's correct to still > say that we've skipped past, even if we add more characters. Probably. The matched string is highlighted partly in the buffer, and exactly the same parts are highlighted in the isearch prompt too - the string "buf" is highlighted as the matched string in the buffer, and the same string "buf" has no failure indication in the isearch prompt. So currently there is consistency between these highlightings: [-- Attachment #2: isearch-fail-pos.png --] [-- Type: image/png, Size: 16310 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-06 17:03 ` Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-07 20:48 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-07 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-07 20:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Juri Linkov; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes: > The matched string is highlighted partly in the buffer, > and exactly the same parts are highlighted in the isearch prompt too - > the string "buf" is highlighted as the matched string in the buffer, > and the same string "buf" has no failure indication in the isearch prompt. > So currently there is consistency between these highlightings: But before we type "fer", "buf" is highlit as failing, but after "fer" is highlit as failing (in the echo area), while the highlighting in the buffer doesn't change. 😀 -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity 2021-12-07 20:48 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2021-12-07 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread From: Juri Linkov @ 2021-12-07 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 14729, Dani Moncayo >> The matched string is highlighted partly in the buffer, >> and exactly the same parts are highlighted in the isearch prompt too - >> the string "buf" is highlighted as the matched string in the buffer, >> and the same string "buf" has no failure indication in the isearch prompt. >> So currently there is consistency between these highlightings: > > But before we type "fer", "buf" is highlit as failing, but after "fer" > is highlit as failing (in the echo area), while the highlighting in the > buffer doesn't change. 😀 This is why the subject is "Search oddity": it's working in a most peculiar way, and the circuit's dead, and there's something wrong 😁 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-12-07 21:53 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-06-27 9:58 bug#14729: 24.3.50; Isearch oddity Dani Moncayo 2013-06-27 23:44 ` Juri Linkov 2013-06-29 17:22 ` Dani Moncayo 2013-06-29 21:53 ` Juri Linkov 2013-06-29 22:34 ` Dani Moncayo 2013-06-30 3:11 ` Drew Adams 2021-12-04 3:51 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-04 16:48 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams 2021-12-04 19:59 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-04 22:06 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-05 9:35 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-05 20:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 2:09 ` bug#14729: [External] : " Drew Adams 2021-12-06 9:33 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-06 9:40 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-06 16:01 ` Drew Adams 2021-12-06 17:03 ` Juri Linkov 2021-12-07 20:48 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen 2021-12-07 21:53 ` Juri Linkov
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).
![[-- Attachment #2: isearch-fail-pos.png --] [-- Type: image/png, Size: 16310 bytes --]](../../867dch239c.fsf@mail.linkov.net/2-isearch-fail-pos.png){kind=link}