From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lax matching is not a great default behavior Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 13:15:18 +0200 Message-ID: <83fuzhf8op.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83twnxfi0h.fsf@gnu.org> <6741424b-fb48-48d1-a2fe-a5b755373c46@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1449314159 5778 80.91.229.3 (5 Dec 2015 11:15:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 11:15:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jwiegley@gmail.com, per@starback.se, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 05 12:15:50 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1a5Aog-0004Tg-F1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 12:15:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46018 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5Aof-0002yw-SN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 06:15:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34699) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5AoQ-0002xy-Tp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 06:15:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5AoM-0002UZ-QE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 06:15:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout24.012.net.il ([80.179.55.180]:34719) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5AoM-0002UU-IC; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 06:15:30 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout24.012.net.il by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NYV00M00T1J5N00@mtaout24.012.net.il>; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 13:08:16 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NYV00J7XTLS7V60@mtaout24.012.net.il>; Sat, 05 Dec 2015 13:08:16 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <6741424b-fb48-48d1-a2fe-a5b755373c46@default> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.180 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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 Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:195920 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 01:27:03 -0800 (PST) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: per@starback.se, jwiegley@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > > Whether it is formally defined or not does not answer the > > > question about the name to use for Emacs users. > > > > "Character folding" is the accepted terminology for this, we didn't > > invent it. Likewise "character sequence equivalence". > > I've already agreed (from the beginning) that "character > folding" is the right term for Emacs to use. And that > speaking of character equivalences is also appropriate. > > (There has been some talk of adding multi-character string > equivalences, but even if we match strings instead of just > chars, speaking of "character foldings" makes sense to me.) Yes, multi-character string equivalences are supported. > I mentioned "ad hoc" character equivalences because I didn't > think that the quotation-mark equivalences we've added are > included in any of the Unicode equivalences (whether > "canonically equivalent" or "compatible"). Indeed, we added equivalences for quote characters that are not defined by Unicode database. I think that these equivalences should just be the initial value for the user-customizable part of the feature. And I don't think these few additions justify new terminology, the existing one still describes even that.