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: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric? Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 10:51:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <2a7b9134-af2a-462d-af6c-d02bad60bbe8@default> <55E5C9AC.3010007@lanl.gov> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1441129912 19517 80.91.229.3 (1 Sep 2015 17:51:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:51:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Davis Herring Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 01 19:51:40 2015 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 1ZWpid-0000Zb-IF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:51:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56507 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZWpic-0008Vg-SF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:51:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53506) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZWpiN-00089n-MB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:51:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZWpiJ-00011W-JL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:51:23 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:34062) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZWpiJ-000114-DN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:51:19 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t81HpAZw010832 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:51:11 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t81HpA7K011646 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:51:10 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0012.oracle.com (abhmp0012.oracle.com [141.146.116.18]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t81HpAvf014401; Tue, 1 Sep 2015 17:51:10 GMT In-Reply-To: <55E5C9AC.3010007@lanl.gov> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 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:189406 Archived-At: > Because having both input characters mean the same thing > uselessly deprives the user of expressive power. Examples/arguments/reasons, please. IOW, prove it. You can always toggle char folding, just as you can toggle case folding. IMO, more users have been tripped up than helped by the rule that "An upper-case letter anywhere in the incremental search string makes the search case-sensitive." (emacs) Search Case. Letting a user toggle between matching chars one-to-one and matching chars according to equivalence classes, is sufficient and clear, IMO. Adding rules on top of this is not helpful. But I would not oppose the current behavior as an option. Let users decide whether matching is symmetric or asymmetric. Maybe even let users toggle, or cycle among these two folding (one-many) behaviors and unfolded (one-one matching) behavior. > > Why not? Why, when char folding, treat plain a specially for > > searching? Why not treat =E1, a, =E0, =E3, =AA, =E2, =E5, and =E4 the = same? >=20 > For exactly the same reason. What reason? Please show how this optional matching behavior "deprives the user of expressive power".