[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth
From: |
Allen Li |
Subject: |
bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth |
Date: |
Wed, 03 Mar 2021 20:50:23 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Allen Li <darkfeline@felesatra.moe>
>>
>> This is okay, IMO, but it would be better to allow the user to specify
>> GLOBAL-ARGS interactively if the user invokes the command with a
>> prefix argument.
>>
>> How would that interact with find-args-history?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the question. What does prefix arg have to
> do with history? Maybe I'm missing something.
Currently, `find-dired' stores the `completing-read' history for `args' in
`find-args-history'. It also stores the value for `args' in `find-args'
to use as the default for the next `find-dired' interactive call.
If we were to make `global-args' accessible interactively, how would the
history for it be stored? The obvious solution would be to add a
completing-read for `global-args' and create `find-global-args-history'
and `find-global-args' variables to be treated similarly to
`find-args-history' and `find-args' are now.
There are two issues with this.
First, consider what the user would do if they want to repeat a
`find-dired' with `global-args' three calls in the past:
C-u M-x find-dired RET
some/directory RET
M-p M-p M-p RET ; going back three items in the history for args
M-p M-p M-p RET ; going back three items in the history for global-args
This is a poor user experience.
Second, if the user mistakenly omits the C-u, then they might run a
previous command without the global-args that were supplied.
Consider if the user runs find-dired like so:
C-u M-x find-dired RET
some/dir RET
-some -query RET
-maxdepth 3 RET
Then the user wants to repeat the query for another directory:
M-x find-dired RET
other/dir RET
M-p RET ; get previous input, M-p can be omitted since there's a default
Because the user didn't supply the C-u, the "-maxdepth 3" is omitted.
Even though it was the user's intent to repeat the last query, the user
is now running a fundamentally different query. Again, this is a poor
user experience.
- bug#46884: 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/02
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/02
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/02
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/03/03
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/03
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/03/03
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth,
Allen Li <=
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Juri Linkov, 2021/03/04
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/04
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/03/05
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/12
- bug#46884: [External] : bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Drew Adams, 2021/03/12
- bug#46884: [External] : bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/12
- bug#46884: [External] : bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Drew Adams, 2021/03/12
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/03/13
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Andreas Schwab, 2021/03/13
- bug#46884: [PATCH] 27.1; Cannot run find-dired with -maxdepth, Allen Li, 2021/03/13