From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: search-whitespace-regexp Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 08:17:41 +0900 Message-ID: References: <1982.220.255.95.17.1107526353.squirrel@220.255.95.17> <35379.203.116.59.24.1107655186.squirrel@203.116.59.24> <87pszdslu1.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87ekftpan6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> Reply-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, miles@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107733449 22955 80.91.229.2 (6 Feb 2005 23:44:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 23:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 00:44:08 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cxw4R-0002VI-Jl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:44:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CxwIM-0002lH-0w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:58:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CxwGh-0001yb-4s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:56:43 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1CxwGW-0001vA-Jj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:56:35 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CxwGV-0001ol-L3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:56:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [64.233.184.201] (helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cxvev-0003ce-G1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:17:41 -0500 Original-Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 36so519324wri for ; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:17:41 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=fqYhsXrDJzPBmDEoL7qAIbQqlWQdpSuD5KQnxQxp6XnGHOxK3FdxViO+bXM9/23rSjSnzRMTndQB+iABX5Vpc5CTo+7bLq3itvsDuKBXd1zhNiJO8vfvleepkTx3iHarTYpZSaWmTi8cRtmuu9aig+LAisDkDj8vC4c3tbxAbOc= Original-Received: by 10.54.59.37 with SMTP id h37mr22406wra; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:17:41 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.54.19.59 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 15:17:41 -0800 (PST) Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: <87ekftpan6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:32976 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:32976 On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:49:42 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> Wait. That doesn't make any sense. I haven't seen *anyone* ask for plain > >> search to treat spaces as "just one SPC char". AFAICT everybody is happy > >> with the behavior where a space in the search text is interpreted as "any > >> sequence of blank chars". > > > FWIW, there are definitely cases where I get pissed at regexp-search > > for doing that -- it's not always the case that one is just searching > > for words that are separated by "some whitespace", sometimes the > > actual whitespace matters. > > Right: in *regexp* search. Er, well, that's the point -- so far it's been a problem only in regexp search because that feature (whitespace fuzzy matching) has only been implemented there. If it's implemented by default in normal isearch, it might start to be a problem there too. It might even be a bigger problem because while people generally expect regexp searches to be a bit fuzzy, they might expect a non-regexp search to be exact. Since the fuzzy whitespace matching often "looks" like normal matching (because the majority of whitespace is in fact a single space), it might take some time to see what's going on, resulting in some subtle errors. This is particularly true if one embeds a search inside a keyboard macro [which I often do]. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.