From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: PATCH: isearch-yank-until-char Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <87tvakfnv4.fsf@red-bean.com> <87lfvvjxjs.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87sgq1r9rb.fsf@red-bean.com> <87lfvt6m1e.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <877e7256uc.fsf@red-bean.com> <604cbbef-7e25-486a-a97a-9bc1adf23928@default> <871rx87b9h.fsf@red-bean.com> <77205e15-f38a-46dc-9451-4030a318900a@default> <874l23ak8m.fsf@red-bean.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="19265"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: Emacs developers To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 26 21:39:01 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i2KpR-0004sy-GN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 21:39:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57070 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i2KpQ-0006i2-7X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:39:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42066) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i2Kmz-0005F5-OS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:36:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i2Kmx-0008Kl-UU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:36:28 -0400 Original-Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:46518) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i2Kmx-0008KG-Gm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:36:27 -0400 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7QJSnkp095472; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:25 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=Meg8iD9mOBcX4cDo8TxnPLH7ks6Q21i7gxxESe0yNUs=; b=Znrozsmu7XACyshYZNFXepKqmYrM8mBWdFrK7wqcKbXJxuQ9I/XO72gvB5ht8SVSUA/K ZyfrAVdcV6CGPuAnmEEuxFMOUD9kvtQUJylR6Vc4QYrellcV2R5aAYnIwlkQ8SMRGBJH 5dU7DY28PwG3Ut6UUQieA3/6X21GAmR1aSCTn88FQxhq8z5hB0OZs9j812oFo/kzaWUb uPMBQImWBtTxjZhAIomeap2L05NQBF1b1eiSf/fdjly34WCcQwAUMKsU3CNQ/U2IjGei Kd0g33QGd14VMSHvx7mS9rSog5z4Zz6IKoEjz74y4e+WgeaMPMBh4tGRe1YLI8cOzEbd aQ== Original-Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2ujwvqbhhg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:25 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7QJXSvO097649; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:25 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2umj1te01c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:25 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0004.oracle.com (abhmp0004.oracle.com [141.146.116.10]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x7QJaOk5014707; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:36:24 GMT In-Reply-To: <874l23ak8m.fsf@red-bean.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4873.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9361 signatures=668684 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908260184 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9361 signatures=668684 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908260184 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.85 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:239589 Archived-At: > So let's have it subsume my patch by coming after my patch :-). OK. (But I can guess the outcome. It's OK; I can always just add the enhancement to isearch+.el. It won't be the first time.) > An updated patch is attached. The only new changes in this patch are: >=20 > * Updated the keybinding in isearch-mode-map to C-M-. FYI, it doesn't do that in the parts that are doc. Those patch parts still speak of `C-M-c'. > * Make the search for the character case-sensitive. (Seems like a > pretty obvious improvement, given the use cases: when the goal > character is a letter at all, one is either looking at that letter on > the screen *or* the letter is some known syntactic delimiter and its > case is therefore known as well even if the letter is off the screen > right now.) FWIW, I don't think that's really TRT. Personally, I have `case-fold-search' set to nil by default, so that behavior isn't a problem for me. But I don't think it should be part of this command. Users can toggle case-folding in Isearch easily. There's no reason to have this command make an assumption about whether its char-search should be case-sensitive. I don't think the either...or assumption you made above is good for the command to make. Better to let users control whether to search for the char case-sensitively.