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: 20 May 2002 01:29:09 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xlmafzph6.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1021847424 4679 127.0.0.1 (19 May 2002 22:30:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 22:30:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Richard Stallman , 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 179ZC4-0001DM-00 for ; Mon, 20 May 2002 00:30:24 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 179ZPj-0004C0-00 for ; Mon, 20 May 2002 00:44:31 +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 179ZCL-0007q4-00; Sun, 19 May 2002 18:30:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 179ZAB-0007cn-00; Sun, 19 May 2002 18:28:27 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E8977C016; Sun, 19 May 2002 22:28:25 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 27 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:4144 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4144 Eli Zaretskii writes: > On Sat, 18 May 2002, Richard Stallman wrote: > > > > I don't like the "and" approach -- at least not as the default. > > > > I'm afraid anything else will bring too many hits. > > > > The rule that at least two of the keywords must match > > should not bring too many hits, I would think. > > An example with two words discussed here brought about 70 hits, which > IMHO is too many. If those two words are find and file, there *are* 70 commands which contains both words ... how do you suggest emacs should decide which of those to show (if you insist that 70 is too many)? > > Moreover, I think a rule based on the number of matched keywords is not > good enough, since sometimes even one word is enough to yield a very > accurate result. Try "M-x apropos bell RET", for example. So does M-x apropos RET ring bell RET :-) -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk