[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:57:02 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
> In my previous mail I intended to say:
>> And the results are that stuff is not found indeed when using
>> isearch.
> Good!
>> query-replace-regexp, however, still finds it.
> Seems like a general problem with invisible text and replace.
> Should it be fixed?

I think that all user-level search-type commands should behave
consistently.  query-replace (and its cousins) are implemented quite
differently from search and isearch.  Fixing this seems desirable in
the long run, but completely infeasible now.

Getting this consistent is a _lot_ of work.  For example, commands
like zap-to-char, forward-sexp and so on also are user-level commands,
as are fill-region and indent: how to deal with invisibility there
(actually a topic that AUCTeX&preview-latex has mostly evaded
addressing properly up to now): does it make sense to tamper with
material that actually cannot contribute to the screen effect the
commands are supposed to achieve?

It would appear sensible to draw the line somewhere.  The current line
between search on the one hand and search&replace on the other seems
particularly arbitrary, but I don't see that we should even think
about it before the release.

>>  Non-interactive search doesn't find it.
> That's ok I think.

Yes (I am not talking about the Lisp-level command, but about C-s RET).

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]