[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 10:51:09 -0700 (PDT)

> Because having both input characters mean the same thing
> uselessly deprives the user of expressive power.

Examples/arguments/reasons, please.  IOW, prove it.

You can always toggle char folding, just as you can toggle
case folding.

IMO, more users have been tripped up than helped by the rule
that "An upper-case letter anywhere in the incremental search
string makes the search case-sensitive." (emacs) Search Case.

Letting a user toggle between matching chars one-to-one and
matching chars according to equivalence classes, is sufficient
and clear, IMO.  Adding rules on top of this is not helpful.

But I would not oppose the current behavior as an option.
Let users decide whether matching is symmetric or asymmetric.

Maybe even let users toggle, or cycle among these two folding
(one-many) behaviors and unfolded (one-one matching) behavior.

> > Why not?  Why, when char folding, treat plain a specially for
> > searching?  Why not treat á, a, à, ã, ª, â, å, and ä the same?
> For exactly the same reason.

What reason?  Please show how this optional matching
behavior "deprives the user of expressive power".

reply via email to

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