Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 3/3/07, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Vadim wrote:
>> >> ? foo - exact search
>> >> ?? foo - inexact search as substring
>
> I have this functionality implemented in my local sandbox.
> I'll commit it today or tomorrow.
>
>> 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, of the 6 people who've recently voiced their opinions on this
> proposal (in this thread and another one from a few days ago),
> you're the only one who is opposed.
Opposed to what? I think ? and ?? are good ideas. I just fail to see
any reason why the behavior of ? should change to be an exact search.
Such a change would certainly frustrate me, because I'm used to ? being
an substring search. Surely others would be frustrated too? Maybe it's
just me.
Ray