From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: should search ring contain duplicates? Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 16:46:27 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1147650431 22797 80.91.229.2 (14 May 2006 23:47:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 23:47:11 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 15 01:47:09 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfQIj-0000FT-OM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 May 2006 01:47:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfQIj-0002Oo-6Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 19:47:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FfQIR-0002Nl-Ja for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 19:46:47 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FfQIO-0002Mz-Iy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 19:46:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfQIO-0002Mp-9y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 19:46:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [148.87.113.118] (helo=rgminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.52) id 1FfQKf-0003Z6-L8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 19:49:06 -0400 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.49]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id k4ENka9n005565 for ; Sun, 14 May 2006 17:46:36 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-csvpn-gw1-141-144-64-195.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.64.195]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id k4ENkZtg007563 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 14 May 2006 17:46:36 -0600 Original-To: "Emacs-Devel" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:54466 Archived-At: See the thread at http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2004-09/msg00038.html Thx. The only argument I see in that thread for ever allowing duplicates is the point RMS raised about a command history. Could you show me what I said, back then, about a command history? I don't remember it, and it is not easy for me to look through a thread. Clicking the link shows this: There was one question left, if removing duplicates from history should be turned on by default. IMHO duplicates should be removed from history by default, most users are more interested in the unique data present in history. If an exact sequence of events is desired M-x list-command-history can do that. [I reformated the last message from Stephan in that thread to make it clear who said what]: Dan> How about the default? Should this be turned on by default? Juri> It seems reasonable to turn it on by default. RMS> Absolutely not! It would be a great surprise, and it would mean RMS> you could not look around at your error messages without changing RMS> other buffers on the screen. Stephan> Huh? I don't understand why removing duplicates from the history Stephan> would ever have any such effect. Stephan> Could you explain what use case you're thinking of ?