From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Simple isearch concerns Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 16:49:13 +0300 Message-ID: <83wntb7eli.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210403001539.x4rb55dvh46rmhb3.ref@Ergus> <20210403001539.x4rb55dvh46rmhb3@Ergus> <878s5wmsjp.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87mtubz4ls.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8735w22s9b.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <3ec7e2e58a3733a48ae9@heytings.org> <878s5tc0rn.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <3ec7e2e58a49d4f0ec99@heytings.org> <878s5t9p1i.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <9ff81b52fad2911cc740@heytings.org> <87im4w1tgw.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <9ff81b52fa878cb35a86@heytings.org> <87pmz4zgn5.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83eefk802u.fsf@gnu.org> <871rbjdea4.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8335vz91en.fsf@gnu.org> <940751cee594ef1cf8a4@heytings.org> <83zgy77hep.fsf@gnu.org> <940751cee566285b8519@heytings.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23796"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: spacibba@aol.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 09 15:50:02 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lUrWL-00063v-Kc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 15:50:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51332 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUrWK-0008OS-NU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:50:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39868) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUrVr-0007yK-Az for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:49:31 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50936) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUrVq-0001FJ-EH; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:49:30 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4651 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lUrVp-0003MY-Od; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:49:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <940751cee566285b8519@heytings.org> (message from Gregory Heytings on Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:26:09 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:267716 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:26:09 +0000 > From: Gregory Heytings > cc: juri@linkov.net, spacibba@aol.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > The issue is whether we need to change the direction as a side effect of > > isearch-beginning-of-buffer. From my POV, this is unexpected. The > > direction should stay what it was before. > > Yes, I understand the issue, but disagree that it is unexpected. Just try > it, replace: > > (isearch-repeat 'forward arg))) > > by: > > (isearch-repeat (if isearch-forward 'forward 'backward) arg))) > > in isearch-beginning-of-buffer, type C-r isearch M-s M-<, and you'll see > that on the contrary not changing the direction is unexpected, that > behavior can only be considered as a bug. Why do you consider that behavior a bug? If the user wants to change the direction, he/she can do that any time. > > Why do you think this is not what the user will expect? > > Because this is not what M-< = beginning-of-buffer does, and this is also > not what the docstring of isearch-beginning-of-buffer says: "Go to the > first occurrence of the current search string. Move point to the beginning > of the buffer and search forwards from the top." I'm saying that the side effect of changing the search direction is a mistake. Fixing the documentation to describe the behavior is a no-brainer, the main issue is what kind of behavior do we want in this case.