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: new apropos feature in Emacs-22 Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 12:38:37 -0800 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1131223185 8379 80.91.229.2 (5 Nov 2005 20:39:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 20:39:45 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 05 21:39:43 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EYUoc-0001Lz-GV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 21:39:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EYUob-0001u2-U5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 15:39:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EYUoN-0001tp-G1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 15:38:51 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EYUoL-0001tH-Pq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 15:38:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EYUoK-0001t8-Ta for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 15:38:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [148.87.122.30] (helo=rgminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1EYUoK-0002k4-Te for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2005 15:38:49 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.49]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id jA5KckOC014489 for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:38:46 -0700 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id jA5KcjkW030330 for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:38:45 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw2-141-144-72-186.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.72.186]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id jA5Kci6e030318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:38:45 -0700 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE 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:45471 Archived-At: Please be sure to read the discussions about the various aspects of this feature. It starts here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2002-05/msg00397.html You will see that I already suggested back then to have a separate command, in this message: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2002-05/msg00400.html The ensuing discussion mentioned some drawbacks of that suggestion. Thanks for the links. I'll keep quiet after this - suffice it to say that I don't agree with this new feature, and the "drawbacks" mentioned to using a separate command were skimpy. 80% of that thread was about how to implement a keyword-search feature within apropos, not whether or not that was a good idea. This was the only "drawback" that I saw mentioned in the whole thread (please correct me, if I missed something): - All apropos commands should `accept the same type of "search patterns".' And this question was raised, but not pursued (that I saw): `What would apropos-keywords look for? `commands', `variables' `documentation', or "all of the above" ?' That one "drawback" wasn't discussed at all, that I saw. I don't see _why_ all apropos commands _should_ accept the same type of "search patterns" - what is the argument for this? I didn't see any. Are we perhaps worried about people _expecting_ that all commands that have the word "apropos" in their names behave the same way wrt input (unlikely, IMO)? Is that the unstated worry? If so: 1) I think that's being a bit skittish. 2) We could, instead, introduce a command (or a whole series of different commands, to respond to the question raised but not answered) that uses keywords and does _not_ have the word "apropos" in its name. If that (the name) is the only real concern, then let us choose a different name for the keyword-search command(s) (hey, how about `keyword-search'?) How did the (useful!) feature of keyword search get injected and locked into the existing apropos commands? (Virus? ;-)) As I said, we're asking for trouble by trying to mix regexp syntax and keyword syntax. The former is confusing enough - imagine how it will be when people fall into it by accident! My bet is that neither the regexp syntax nor the keyword syntax will be clear cut or work well. Now, I'll shut up, after one last request: Can we please have available some function(s) that will give the original, regexp-syntax-only behavior, so that we may individually get back to something reasonable? That is, can we have functions (not necessarily aimed at novices) that we can use to build commands that do what the apropos family did before? It could be `apropos-internal' (plus equivalents for doc etc.) - or something else, if `apropos-internal' has already been infected too ;-).