Re: address@hidden: grep-tree doesn't shell-quote-argument]

[David Kastrup]

Bill Wohler <address@hidden> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>>> So what you suggest is that the current grep-tree should replace
>>>> grep-find/find-grep as the default interface, and the current
>>>> grep-find functionality should be selected if a prefix arg is
>>>> specified.
>>
>>> This is somewhat radical and might surprise people.
>>
>> Surprise is not bad.
>
> If you're producing a horror film, perhaps. But not in a UI. ;-)
>
> I agree with Eli--there are way too many grep commands (and that was
> before I just learned about grep-tree).

Yes.

> find-grep is redundant with grep's -r and --include
> options.

No.  Only the most primitive calls of find-grep can be catered for by
"grep's" -r and --include options, and many greps don't even have
those options.

> grep-tree is redundant with find-grep.

Which is why we are discussing how to merge them...

> We only need two: grep (which shows you the grep hits) and
> grep-dired (which lists the matched files in dired).

Disagree.  Find can't be obliterated for all usage cases, but using it
for something like *.[ch] would certainly be inconvenient.

> The default UIs for both should be simple (like grep-tree), but
> should allow editing of the command with the prefix argument.

> Another thought: it would be nice if the -i option were passed to grep
> if case-fold-search is t.

The setting of case-fold-search rarely is fine-tuned to the current
editing need, so I doubt that passing it on to grep would feel natural
to people.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum