From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: why does occur depropertize matching lines?
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:03:38 -0500
Message-ID: <E1CXnFi-0003QA-Nf@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <FDELKNEBLPKKDCEBEJCBIELACJAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
	<87653zkezn.fsf@jurta.org> <E1CX9EZ-0006Kb-A2@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<87653uqqox.fsf@jurta.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1101503185 10200 80.91.229.6 (26 Nov 2004 21:06:25 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:06:25 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 26 22:06:11 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1CXnIB-0001o3-00
	for <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:06:11 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CXnRR-0002UA-Ff
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:15:45 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CXnRK-0002Tz-FE
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:15:38 -0500
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CXnRJ-0002Ta-OC
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:15:37 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CXnRJ-0002TX-M0
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:15:37 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CXnHt-00018Y-M5
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:05:53 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CXnFi-0003QA-Nf; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:03:38 -0500
Original-To: Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org>
In-reply-to: <87653uqqox.fsf@jurta.org> (message from Juri Linkov on Thu, 25
	Nov 2004 09:27:11 +0200)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:30406
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:30406

    Inverting the meaning of the `keep-props' argument for context lines is
    too unnatural thing to do.  It's more natural to expect that users
    might want to highlight either everything (matching and context lines)
    or nothing.

I think users will like the behavior that results from the changes I
wrote.  I like it, and it seems natural to me.  Why wouldn't other
people like it?