From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15166: 24.3.50; Isearch for an octal code Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 07:47:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0bbc13a6-a62d-4b2a-8608-3b84d45303f2@default> References: <87d2p4ovyn.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <8738pzmo4s.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1377355703 28599 80.91.229.3 (24 Aug 2013 14:48:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:48:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15166@debbugs.gnu.org To: Juri Linkov , Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 24 16:48:24 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1VDF8Z-0003BS-QE for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 16:48:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41942 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF8Z-0006FO-F2 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:48:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57794) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF8N-0006EP-9u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:48:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF8E-0000ns-KY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:48:11 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:58250) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF8E-0000nk-Gq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:48:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF8E-0007UH-5S for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:48:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:48:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 15166 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 15166-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B15166.137735565528736 (code B ref 15166); Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:48:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15166) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Aug 2013 14:47:35 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52566 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF7m-0007TQ-UB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:47:35 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:49927) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VDF7k-0007TH-Lh for 15166@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:47:33 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r7OElUxY017097 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:47:31 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7021.oracle.com (aserz7021.oracle.com [141.146.126.230]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7OElTxQ019999 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:47:29 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt108.oracle.com (abhmt108.oracle.com [141.146.116.60]) by aserz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7OElTuo019996; Sat, 24 Aug 2013 14:47:29 GMT In-Reply-To: <8738pzmo4s.fsf@mail.jurta.org> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6680.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:77699 Archived-At: > > Why is C-q SPC obsolete? >=20 > The problem is that C-q SPC has limited applicability - > it works only in regexp isearch, and has no effect in > normal non-regexp isearch. This might be too confusing > to users when typing the same key sequence unexpectedly > works differently in different isearch modes. >=20 > Initially C-q SPC was intended only for regexp isearch, > but after introduction of isearch-lax-whitespace mode > it can't be used in non-regexp mode because the C-q SPC > feature was based on regexps. >=20 > I don't propose to remove it now, keeping it for users > that rely on it in regexp search. But to remove mentions > from documentation to not confuse users about the feature > that doesn't work in non-regexp mode. What doesn't work? Can you please elaborate? It's not clear to me what you mean by C-q SPC not working for non-regexp isearch. I can only guess that you mean that, although C-q SPC does in fact add a SPC char to the search string, that does not cause non-regexp isearch to search for only one SPC (per SPC char added to the search string). If that's what you mean then I don't see that as a problem. At least not a problem wrt C-q SPC. (The confusion is elsewhere.) In that case, C-q SPC still does its job. Anything confusing coming from the result is confusion coming from the fact that isearch now interprets any number of contiguous SPC chars in the search string - including, in particular, just one SPC char - as an arbitrarily long sequence of whitespace chars to match. I was not particularly in favor of that change to Emacs, as you know, but so be it. The point here is that given that change there is AFAICT nothing broken, unexpected, or confusing about the behavior of C-q SPC. (As far as I can see.) Perhaps you can give a recipe showing the confusion you have in mind, if it is different from what I am supposing, and if it is in fact something directly related to C-q SPC. Thx.