From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: isearch-whole-buffer? Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:07:40 +0900 Message-ID: <87odzudklv.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <-N-dnckRSdxBlrnZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@mcgill.ca> <44ydndg4Yss-VbjZnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@mcgill.ca> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1143359501 6535 80.91.229.2 (26 Mar 2006 07:51:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 07:51:41 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 26 09:51:38 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FNQ29-0006QO-Ud for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 09:51:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FNQ2A-0001jb-C6 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 02:51:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FNKfV-0005km-0h for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 21:07:49 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FNKfQ-0005ka-RM for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 21:07:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FNKfQ-0005kX-NG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 21:07:44 -0500 Original-Received: from [203.216.5.72] (helo=smtp02.dentaku.gol.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FNKga-0002UO-D9; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 21:08:56 -0500 Original-Received: from 203-216-104-242.dsl.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.104.242] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp02.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1FNKfM-0006mW-VU; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:07:41 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B39112F42; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:07:40 +0900 (JST) Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <44ydndg4Yss-VbjZnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@mcgill.ca> (xyblor's message of "Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:48:13 -0500") Original-Lines: 29 X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 02:51:16 -0500 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:33990 Archived-At: xyblor writes: > There's also a more general design issue at play here: it seems to me > that most of the time, when a person initiates a search, s/he wants to > answer the question "where in this buffer will I find this string?" not > "where will I find this string in the portion of the buffer that is > below/above the point?". I find Firefox's "find" (control-f) to be more > sensible in this regard, and I am surprised that in the long history of > Emacs' development, nobody seems to have shared this view I find the Emacs method far more natural than the search-whole-buffer method -- it's extremely confusing if a search _can't_ fail because it just automatically wraps. In other words, the Emacs method gives you more easily usable information about your search. To find out if you've reached the last occurance of a string in an "auto wrap" system, you've got to always note the position of your last match, and manually compare to the position after hitting search, which is quite annoying in practice. The fact that Emacs basically _does_ give you the "whole buffer" functionality with just one more repetition of the search key seems like a pretty good way to satisfy both scenarios with a minimum of fuss. -Miles -- `...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]