From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Apropos commands and regexps Date: 17 May 2002 00:26:43 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xg00r4tlo.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: <5xbsbj9834.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200205150700.g4F70rr16163@aztec.santafe.edu> <87ptzxmz7s.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <5xoffhoywn.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1021584431 24938 127.0.0.1 (16 May 2002 21:27:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 21:27:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, eliz@is.elta.co.il, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 178SmF-0006U6-00 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 23:27:11 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 178SyQ-0005qS-00 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 23:39:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 178SmP-0005pN-00; Thu, 16 May 2002 17:27:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 178Sl6-0005ks-00; Thu, 16 May 2002 17:26:00 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 4E3547C016; Thu, 16 May 2002 21:25:58 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 49 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.50 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4029 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4029 Miles Bader writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > I don't like the "and" approach -- at least not as the default. > > (see my previous posting for the rationale). > > `and' is the defautl for all search engines that I've used, and has the > advantage of being simple and easy to understand. A quick test shows that Google, Yahoo, Lycos uses AND while Altavista, Excite, AskJeeves uses OR. That's 50/50... For WEB search engines, I think AND does make sense -- since there are SOOOO many pages to match. But for a limited universe like emacs -- which doesn't always use the most obvious terms -- using AND doesn't make a lot of sense to me. > > Perhaps your idea of `2 or more' would work better in practice, but > it's hard to say without some real experience. I think it is adequate in practice. > > > Comparing to WEB search engines, I don't think that separating > > keywords with commas is common practice... > > No, but it's common practice in writing lists. I don't see the relevance, sorry. But of course, we could ignore commas in case people use them... > > > Consider searching for "grep" -- shouldn't that return "igrep" ? > > Good point; I guess maybe it shouldn't do any anchoring at all (bit > annoying, that, since I often get lots of false hits when my apropos > term unexpectedly happens to occur in the middle of a common english > word...). We could put a "button bar" at the top of the apropos output with the following buttons: [Match all words] [anchored match] [search documentation] -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk