|
From: | Davis Herring |
Subject: | Re: Isearch interaction model |
Date: | Thu, 1 Mar 2018 17:19:52 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 |
We have a search history because it's often the case that we want to repeat something we've recently done --- look up the same word, find the same function, and so on. It doesn't make sense to me that the exact mechanism we use to search for a particular thing shouldaffect its recency or the way in which we recall it.
But "repeating" a search for \_<foo\_> as a non-regexp search is useless.
It's very easy already to casually switch between literal and regex isearch with M-r. Why should this distinction affect the way in whichI think the answer is to have one history which records the mode used for each search, so that it is reused correctly. (When it makes sense, the user can change the search mode after selecting the history element.)we recall that search?
keeping toggled parameters in later searches?
...Which fits nicely with the idea that the parameters are "sticky" (either to a history element or to the user's current state).
Davis --This product is sold by volume, not by mass. If it appears too dense or too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during shipping.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |