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: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:10:28 +0200 Message-ID: <83wpsuh6cr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837fl2qzs2.fsf@gnu.org> <83610ikvto.fsf@gnu.org> <83bna6ipn7.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1449223877 10575 80.91.229.3 (4 Dec 2015 10:11:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:11:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jwiegley@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Per =?utf-8?Q?Starb=C3=A4ck?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 04 11:11:09 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 1a4nKQ-0006xl-7c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 11:11:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39749 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4nKP-0002Sh-Ho for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 05:11:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36215) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4nKB-0002Rh-NX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 05:10:49 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4nK8-0001XD-FR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 05:10:47 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:39248) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4nK8-0001Wt-1N; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 05:10:44 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NYT00B00W12UE00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:10:42 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NYT00B03W9TV600@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 04 Dec 2015 12:10:42 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:195869 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:33:14 +0100 > From: Per Starb=C3=A4ck > Cc: rms@gnu.org, jwiegley@gmail.com, Drew Adams ,=20 > =09"emacs-devel@gnu.org" >=20 > > I see no real reasons yet for such a decision. Character folding= was > > introduced with the explicit goal of giving users what the other > > text-editing and word-processing environments provide, what they > > therefore are expected to expect. To revert that decision will t= ake > > more than just "I think it's wrong" kind of posts. >=20 > I didn't follow its creation, but I don't think users generally exp= ect > that (yet). (I just checked searches in Gedit and Firefox where the= re > were no such features, at least not in the versions that are standa= rd > in my operating system distribution.) Try more serious editing environments. E.g., MS Word does that by default. > Not that I think that matters a lot. I think a good reason to > introduce character folding is because it's a good feature, simple = as > that. But it needs to tried out more and get more feedback from > different locales before made into the default. The entire time interval between Nov 15 this year and until we releas= e Emacs 25.1 (which will take a few months, probably more than 6, judging by past experience) is supposed to provide that feedback. Al= l it takes to turn this off by default is changing the default value of a single variable (and change a couple of places in the User Manual t= o reflect that). Once we decide to do that, it can be done very quickl= y and easily. We can do that a day before the release, if we want to. OTOH, turning it off today means that it will get much less testing, and therefore bugs related to it (like the one reported just today in http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D22090) will most proba= bly remain hidden for who knows how long. > I may have missed something, but I have not read a single "I think > it's wrong" post. Any post that doesn't explain why folding characters might be _wrong_ in _most_ situations is not providing any useful arguments for turnin= g off the default. Most posts I've seen explained why their authors don't like this feature. > I've read that making the feature available to users > first will make it possible to have a poll before changing a defaul= t > that is a massive change, and I've read my own examples of how the > American-centered assumptions are just wrong in some situations. Th= ere > is probably more feedback of a similar kind. By enabling this featu= re > it will be possible to get that feedback, without the outcry that > comes with changing the default. By ironing out the wrinkles this w= ill > be a welcome change when the default later is changed. >=20 > You have to realize that this is a *massive* change, even though it > may not feel so for someone who almost only writes in English. I do realize it's a massive change. And you are wrong assuming that = I almost only write in English (look at my locale), let alone that this is some American-centered view (which would have dictated exactly the opposite default). In any case, introducing massive changes that are turned on by defaul= t is nothing new in Emacs development. Bidirectional display engine introduced in Emacs 24.1 comes to mind; it certainly was much more massive than this one. And turning that one off was nowhere as simpl= e as turning character folding off, so the risk was much higher. We di= d it anyway, because we thought that was TRT to do, and because we wanted any bugs and adverse side effects of that change found and fixed before the release. Likewise here. > >> Should it be "Ignore accents for search"? > > > > No, because ignoring accents is just a small part of character > > folding. Please take a look at character-fold.el for the details= . >=20 > I know, but it has to be called something. Do you have a better sug= gestion? Either "Character Folding in Search" or maybe "Character Equivalence in Search". (I'm not good at finding short descriptive names.) > >> > Alternatively, we > >> > could quickly release Emacs 25.2 with character folding turned= off if > >> > we see an outcry. But polling at this time will not be effici= ent, > >> > IMO. > >> > >> Not at all as good! To "quickly release" something doesn't mean = that > >> it is a quick change for users, who may keep using that version = for a > >> long time. > > > > If they are annoyed by a feature, they will upgrade quickly, I th= ink. >=20 > That kind of user will rather change their options themselves. I'm = not > primarily talking about people installing Emacs themselves, but tho= se > who use a version their system adminstrator or the OS distribution > provider installed for them. A misfeature that causes an outcry will prompt sysadmins to upgrade, = I think.