From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Isearch: retrieve last successful search string from when you quit (`C-g') Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 08:40:52 -0700 Message-ID: <5F547EDB722D47C9919E87174C28D0F0@us.oracle.com> References: <0860CD16FA6A43A7B3FB40FE34C6B934@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349106084 7197 80.91.229.3 (1 Oct 2012 15:41:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:41:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, 'Stefan Monnier' , 'Dani Moncayo' To: "'Christopher Monsanto'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 01 17:41:25 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1TIi7Y-0003N2-3Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:41:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48969 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TIi7S-0000HI-ID for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:41:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59228) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TIi7P-0000HC-T6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:41:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TIi7K-0007K0-0Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:41:15 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:16658) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TIi7J-0007Jw-Q7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:41:09 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q91Ff73U019719 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:41:08 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q91Ff6sI010709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:41:07 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt106.oracle.com (abhmt106.oracle.com [141.146.116.58]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q91Ff60d021425; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 10:41:06 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.219.190) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:41:06 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Ac2f6bvEDRpoFVLEQ7uAtJdWWtk6vgAAHUZg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 141.146.126.227 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153847 Archived-At: > When I hit C-g, it means "I don't want to operate at the search > position, I was just looking for something and now I'm ready to go > back to where I was." Precisely. "I was just looking for something" and I didn't really want to move there - just now at least. And you perhaps have no idea at that time whether you might want to repeat that looking later, or even perhaps move to one of the search hits. The question (between the two proposals) is whether to record all such abandoned searches or just the last one. More precisely (because we could, if we wanted, create additional search rings for this), it is whether to record such abandoned searches in the regular search rings or separately. Should they be mixed in with the accepted/used searches? > > I doubt if you would really love it, in practice. But it > > is simple for you to try it, to see. ... > > That's your speculation :) I'm just putting my two cents in for what > works best for my (perhaps eccentric, but that's none of your > business!) workflow. Since there is a difference in opinion, a user > configurable flag is what I would advocate for. Why don't you try it? Try both.