Re: mention lgrep and rgrep in the docstring for grep

[Kim F. Storm]

Jan Djärv <address@hidden> writes:

> Richard Stallman skrev:
>>     For doing a recursive `grep', sure the `rgrep' command.  For running
>>     `grep' in the current directory sure `lgrep'.
>>
>> If we change that to
>>
>>     For doing a recursive `grep', see the `rgrep' command.  For running
>>     `grep' in the current directory see `lgrep'.
>>
>> then it would be good.
>
> I am confused.  What does lgrep really do that grep doesn't?  "in the
> current directory" doesn't seem to be the case, specifying */* to
> lgrep is perfectly OK.  lgrep seems to set -i (case independent) by
> default whereas grep doesn't. Is that the difference?

That is one difference (actually, -i is set conditionally from 
case-fold-search).

Also M-x lgrep works more like C-u M-x grep, than a plain grep.

But the main reason for lgrep is it's interface is modelled after the rgrep
interface, prompting (and using different input histories) for each argument.

So some of the specific aspects of rgrep also applies to lgrep
(such as the grep-files-aliases feature).

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk