Andreas Eder wrote:
> Vadim wrote:
>
>
>> 2. Decide something about describe.
>> I feel that current default inexact search ? often returns
>> too many lines and this already becomes a bit annoying.
>> Surely this is result of documentation growth - many
>> new sections were incorporated into reference manual.
>> Following recent discussion suggest the following scheme
>> ? foo - exact search
>> ?? foo - inexact search as substring
>> more elaborate search schemes with rgexps seems to be
>> an overkill.
>>
>
> I second this.
>
>
>
As do I, except that I'd like "? foo" to do what it does today, and "??
foo" do the new thing (exact search).
I see no reason to gratuitously change the behavior of ?.
Ray