On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, gARetH baBB wrote:
> I don't think I complained per se, just queried.
Sorry, loose language on my part.
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> On (2003/09/11 14:37), Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> > I agree with you, changing the semantics of "wildlsearch" sounds like
> > a very bad idea.
>
> How about some sideways movement instead? How about extending
> wildlsearch in the same way that lsearch was extended to accept '*' and
> '@' modifiers? Perhaps '!' (meaning "do what I say, damnit!")?
Well, simply providing a new lookup has essentially the same effect. In
fact, what I have implemented this afternoon is "nwildsearch". The only
difference is that the modifier is at the other end of the name. :-)
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
