bug#14712: 24.3.50; `isearch-filter-visible' obsolescence

bug#14712: 24.3.50; `isearch-filter-visible' obsolescence

[Drew Adams]

I use `isearch-filter-visible' in my code.  Recently, you have made it
obsolete.  The `make-obsolete' sexp is not helpful/accurate, AFAICT.  It
says only that `isearch-filter-visible' is replaced by
`isearch-invisible':

(make-obsolete 'isearch-filter-visible 'isearch-invisible "24.4")

That is definitely not true.  For one thing, the former is a function
and the latter is a variable.

The proper replacement is given in the source code:

(or (eq search-invisible t)
    (not (isearch-range-invisible beg end)))

It is that information that needs to be conveyed in the obsolescence
message.





In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-06-20 on ODIEONE
Bzr revision: 113100 eliz@gnu.org-20130620173624-w9v620tog4yacftk
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --prefix=/c/Devel/emacs/binary --enable-checking=yes,glyphs
 CFLAGS=-O0 -g3 LDFLAGS=-Lc:/Devel/emacs/lib
 CPPFLAGS=-Ic:/Devel/emacs/include'

bug#14712: 24.3.50; `isearch-filter-visible' obsolescence

[Stefan Monnier]

tags 14712 notabug
thanks

> The proper replacement is given in the source code:

> (or (eq search-invisible t)
>     (not (isearch-range-invisible beg end)))

> It is that information that needs to be conveyed in the obsolescence
> message.

No, the obsolescence message only points to the other
variable/function/feature with which you can obtain similar results.
It's generally not a drop-in replacement.


        Stefan

bug#14712: 24.3.50; `isearch-filter-visible' obsolescence

[Drew Adams]

> > The proper replacement is given in the source code:
> 
> > (or (eq search-invisible t)
> >     (not (isearch-range-invisible beg end)))
> 
> > It is that information that needs to be conveyed in the obsolescence
> > message.
> 
> No, the obsolescence message only points to the other
> variable/function/feature with which you can obtain similar results.
> It's generally not a drop-in replacement.

No. There is a bug here - perhaps two.

Either (a) the message produced, itself, is incorrect/misleading (I don't have the message in hand), because it tells you to simply "replace" the one by the other, or (b) the doc string of `make-obsolete' is wrong, because it says that:

"The warning will say that CURRENT-NAME should be used instead."

It is not a simple case of using CURRENT-NAME instead of the obsolete name.  This doc string says in effect that this obsolescence operation is simply a renaming (use this name instead of that name), but it is not.

Extremely misleading at the very least.  And outright incorrect, by any reasonable reading.

bug#14712: 24.3.50; `isearch-filter-visible' obsolescence

[Stefan Monnier]

> "The warning will say that CURRENT-NAME should be used instead."

"use dynamite instead of a fishing rod" does not mean that you can just
replace your fishing rod with a stick of dynamite and do everything else
as before.

If it says "use foo, instead", it's pretty clear that you may need to
adjust a few other things accordingly.


        Stefan