[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, 8 Sep 2015 09:58:57 -0700 (PDT)

>  > This should be a no-brainer, IMO.
> Put your code on ELPA and demonstrate its superiority.
> Since it's a no-brainer, there's no risk.

If you're going to quote something written by someone else,
please at least do not mislead by taking it totally out of

Here is that text in context.  It says nothing about
implementation being a no-brainer.

  > Being _able_ to fold `é' to `e' or `è', and to fold one
  > kind of quote mark to others, is, yes, a normal use case.
  > Nothing odd, abstract, or academic about it.  Herr Müller
  > confirms this with his own example.  This should be a
  > no-brainer, IMO.

It's about _what_ users can do.  It should be a no-brainer,
IMO, that users should _be able_ to do what Ulrich, Juri,
and I have requested.  That same emphasis on _being able_
was in the original text quoted, but you still ignored it.

_How_ to fix the current implementation to support that
behavior is a different question.  Feel free to raise that
question - _how_ to do it - in another thread, if you are 
interested.  And contribute code to it, if you like. 

The question this thread raises is why and why not do it.

I've approached this question only from a user point of
view (it is useful to be able to do it).  But it is fine
to present implementation-related considerations that
argue against (or for) doing it.  None seen so far.

reply via email to

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