From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: should search ring contain duplicates? Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 11:00:07 +0300 Message-ID: References: <200605030727.k437R2Wx009975@amrm2.ics.uci.edu> <87bqufwbls.fsf@jurta.org> <85iromw09n.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146902427 15646 80.91.229.2 (6 May 2006 08:00:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 08:00:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 06 10:00:25 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcHiD-0001s9-If for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 10:00:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcHiD-0004J5-4V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 04:00:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcHi0-0004J0-4G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 04:00:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcHhx-0004Il-Mw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 04:00:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcHhx-0004Ie-G5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 04:00:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FcHiI-00008I-6N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 04:00:30 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-211-193.inter.net.il [83.130.211.193]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id ECV71730 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 6 May 2006 11:00:07 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-reply-to: (storm@cua.dk) 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:53993 Archived-At: > From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) > Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 01:55:43 +0200 > Cc: juri@jurta.org, dann@ics.uci.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Richard Stallman writes: > > > Please install add-to-history; > > you can change places to use it, too. > > Done. I'm not sure I see the utility of the second optional argument KEEP-DUPS. It doesn't give you full control of whether the duplicates are removed, unless you also bind history-delete-duplicates, so it's not more convenient than simply binding history-delete-duplicates. Its disadvantage, OTOH, albeit a minor one, is that it makes the doc string harder to understand, due to multiple negations (``unless FOO is nil or BAR is non-nil''). Am I missing something? (If you do change the function, please update the NEWS entry and the Lisp manual where I added its description.)