From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: query-replace in isearch (was Re: should search ring contain duplicates?) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:09:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <200605030727.k437R2Wx009975@amrm2.ics.uci.edu> <87bqufwbls.fsf@jurta.org> <200605031504.k43F49hr001544@scanner2.ics.uci.edu> <87wtcslqoj.fsf@jurta.org> <87y7x75wtp.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1147619446 4194 80.91.229.2 (14 May 2006 15:10:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:10:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, dann@ics.uci.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 14 17:10:45 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 1FfIF2-0003dp-QJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 17:10:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfIF2-0007Lx-9f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:10:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FfIED-0006Li-PH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:09:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FfIEC-0006L0-M3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:09:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfIEC-0006Ks-FN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:09:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FfIGP-00020C-In for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:12:09 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1FfIEB-0001kd-F9; Sun, 14 May 2006 11:09:51 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-reply-to: (storm@cua.dk) 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:54447 Archived-At: > Using > add-to-history will treat this new element just like other new > elements on the same history list. That seems right to me. Do you > think it is wrong in this case? It is wrong if history-delete-duplicates is nil; then it unconditionally adds an element even if it is equal to the head of the history. If history-delete-duplicates is nil, why is that behavior wrong? Isn't it normal, in that case, to add the new element unconditionally?