From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ! in Dired--what was the outcome? Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 17:41:53 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200409220205.i8M25YO10544@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <87zn343792.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1096904624 23790 80.91.229.6 (4 Oct 2004 15:43:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 15:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , teirllm@dms.auburn.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 04 17:43:32 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CEUzr-0002rG-00 for ; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 17:43:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CEV6S-00082w-Jw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:50:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CEV68-00080o-79 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:50:00 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CEV65-0007zY-MT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:49:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CEV65-0007yK-AB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:49:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CEUyT-0002Sq-1H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:42:05 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CEUyJ-0004xO-9q; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:41:56 -0400 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon, 04 Oct 2004 11:18:29 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:27893 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:27893 Richard Stallman writes: > Here is another idea. We could use one ? with one meaning > and ?? for the other meaning. > > What do people think about that? ?? has a valid meaning of its own in shell patterns. ** in contrast would be free for grabs, more or less. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum