[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements
From: |
Stephen Berman |
Subject: |
bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:14:19 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.95 (gnu/linux) |
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:10:28 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
>> Cc: 23937@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:26:12 +0200
>>
>> Set point to the beginning of the occurrence found, and return point.
>> An optional second argument bounds the search; it is a buffer position.
>> The match found must start at or after that position. A value of nil
>> means search to the beginning of the accessible portion of the buffer.
>> Optional third argument, if t, means if fail just return nil (no error).
>> If not nil and not t, move to limit of search and return nil.
>> Optional fourth argument COUNT, if a positive number, means to search
>> for COUNT successive occurrences. If COUNT is negative, search
>> forward, instead of backward, for -COUNT occurrences. A value of
>> nil means the same as 1.
>> The match found is the COUNTth to last one (or last, if COUNT is 1 or
>> nil) in the buffer located entirely before the origin of the search.
>
> LGTM, thanks.
>
>> If you are ok with this, should I add these two lines to all
>> *search-backward and (suitably adapted) *search-forward functions? (The
>> two lines are currently only in {re,posix}-search-backward.)
>
> It's better for all those doc strings to be consistent, yes.
Oh, dear. I made all the changes and was ready to commit them, when I
realized that those final two lines are only valid for positive COUNT.
Spelling it out for negative COUNT seems like overkill; how about this:
With COUNT positive, the match found is the COUNTth to last one (or
last, if COUNT is 1 or nil) in the buffer located entirely before
the origin of the search; correspondingly with COUNT negative.
I hope this is the last point of this issue that needs clarifying.
Steve Berman
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Stephen Berman, 2016/07/10
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/07/11
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Stephen Berman, 2016/07/11
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/07/12
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Stephen Berman, 2016/07/12
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/07/12
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements,
Stephen Berman <=
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/07/12
- bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements, Stephen Berman, 2016/07/12