GNU bug report logs - #23937
25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements

Previous Next

Full log

Message #23 received at 23937 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 23937 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
Subject: Re: bug#23937: 25.0.95; Search functions doc fixes/improvements
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:14:19 +0200

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:10:28 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
>> Cc: 23937 <at> 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

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.