[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric? |
Date: |
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 06:28:40 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> Yes, that is the difference in our views. Sure, "with one character",
> but the flip side is that if you happen to have é in your search string,
> however it got there (e.g. by pasting), then with your preferred behavior
> you *cannot* use your search string to search for "any kind of e".
You are right, for what I originally proposed. It would be like the
current situation with case folding, that you can't paste in a search
string with capital letters and search for it in a case-independent way.
However, in the case of case folding, we solve that by downcasing
text when pasting it into search strings. We could de-accent strings
too when pasting them.
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, (continued)
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/08
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/08
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/08
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/08
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/09
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/09
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/09
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/09
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/09/11
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/11
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Juri Linkov, 2015/09/11
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/11
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/12
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/11
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/11
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/11
- Re: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Richard Stallman, 2015/09/12
- RE: char equivalence classes in search - why not symmetric?, Drew Adams, 2015/09/12