[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".
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, (continued)
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/07
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/09/03
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/09/03
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/03
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/09/03
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/03
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Artur Malabarba, 2015/09/02
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Pip Cet, 2015/09/03
Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Davis Herring, 2015/09/01
RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015/09/01