Quoting Randy Kramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Tony,
>
> Thanks very much!
>
> All,
>
> A followup question and some ruminations below.
>
> On Tuesday 05 August 2008 02:22 pm, Tony Balinski wrote:
> > That's what it did do (5.5).  Now it provides a pointer to the text in
> > the document's buffer. Since the search routines expect a contiguous
> > string and the buffer provides a gap to allow insertion of new text
> > at the insert point, the gap is shuffled to one of the two extremes
> > (whichever is closest to the gap before the shuffle) before returning
> > a pointer to the document's first character in the buffer.
>
> Reading between the lines, I'm guessing that the nedit search routines
> would
> work reasonably well with any string "passed" to them by a pointer.  Is
> that
> reasonably close to true?
>
> (Among my reasons for that guess are that search macros can search an
> "arbitrary" string "passed" to the search macro.)

It can be used this way and is for search_string/replace_in_string macro
built-ins.

> The reason I ask is that I would expect that when folding is implemented,
> the
> user will have the option to search the entire document *or* just the parts
> of the document still visible while the document is folded, so I was
> anticipating the need to be able to create two different search strings.

Could be done with the document's buffer by using the gap area as placement
for the null terminator, I suppose.

> Hmm, just had another thought, though--to avoid problems with anomalous
> results across the boundaries of visible sections of text separated by
> invisible (folded) sections of text, maybe all searches have to be done in
> the full document, and then, if the user is seeking results only in the
> folded document, a followup filter would screen out any hits that aren't
> (fully) visible in the current folded view.  That sounds more correct,
> although a little more work.
-- 
NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected]
http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop

Reply via email to