From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: highlight failed part of isearch input Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:54:52 +0000 Message-ID: <87lk5r3sf7.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <008101c86d06$31c2f1f0$9eb22382@us.oracle.com> <87fxvzxc0j.fsf@jurta.org> <000901c86d0f$5beec1d0$405a908d@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1202777710 2382 80.91.229.12 (12 Feb 2008 00:55:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:55:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Juri Linkov' , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 12 01:55:33 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JOjQn-00023v-UD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:55:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JOjQK-0005x8-MM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:55:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JOjQG-0005wl-Ks for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:56 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JOjQF-0005wM-3t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JOjQE-0005wI-Mr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:55 -0500 Original-Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JOjQE-0004YR-Kt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:54 -0500 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so441843ugf.48 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:54:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; bh=Y3IS5tbhm/GxIHiojpDafpXu+FP9OnIeLbjwQ/lmroY=; b=GQ1NhyjrwmRuXXIl38q4N+4uKKOFPSMLsmBFWhsA/EezxGNwHDcttSrDMCj69xL6Eq4QWc+RNpcoO0NAkgRXeIMC9Q+gLbg8IA91myjiHcwnfPAtA+JyXu7U+dV2FFu6U5Sdvrte2kVod/MJWE55yMuy47gy/ib7E2dzm1a7YtU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:sender; b=rytpKZ/QN/u9W3IDwkh+v1iF4k01TCDWkjH4OjRkSLCZBjEgUuHEoNOOmhRx9nS9ulP9Z2aCmRVlPOjxJZRJ7W/3jZGYhdH6xj68v0JuRUMh1nXtpKhb2GSHTG5W7dmDX4iNbYI1RdVnM+Aa7UXVGXHrZKJmUdff9ZMrMbwuv48= Original-Received: by 10.67.123.19 with SMTP id a19mr9777901ugn.4.1202777693288; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:54:53 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from bzg.ath.cx ( [81.99.213.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i39sm8479245ugd.32.2008.02.11.16.54.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:54:52 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by bzg.ath.cx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1A54D158253; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:54:51 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <000901c86d0f$5beec1d0$405a908d@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:36:50 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:88814 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> >> It seems that only the tweaks that came out of the >> >> secondary discussion in this thread were applied; >> >> the original proposal was not. Here is the diff. >> >> >> >> Would someone please apply that patch, and ack? >> > >> > The patch was apparently never applied. It highlights the >> > part of your isearch input that fails to match. >> >> Did you fix all problems? I remember there were some rough edges. > > As I said, it also incorporates the comments following Richard's email. I tested it and it looks fine. I applied the patch before reading Juri's email, so Juri please check and let me know if you think it is okay. -- Bastien