Re: mention lgrep and rgrep in the docstring for grep

[Jan Djärv]

Kim F. Storm skrev:
> Jan Djärv <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Richard Stallman skrev:
>>>     For doing a recursive `grep', sure the `rgrep' command.  For running
>>>     `grep' in the current directory sure `lgrep'.
>>>
>>> If we change that to
>>>
>>>     For doing a recursive `grep', see the `rgrep' command.  For running
>>>     `grep' in the current directory see `lgrep'.
>>>
>>> then it would be good.
>> I am confused.  What does lgrep really do that grep doesn't?  "in the
>> current directory" doesn't seem to be the case, specifying */* to
>> lgrep is perfectly OK.  lgrep seems to set -i (case independent) by
>> default whereas grep doesn't. Is that the difference?
>
> That is one difference (actually, -i is set conditionally from 
case-fold-search).
>
> Also M-x lgrep works more like C-u M-x grep, than a plain grep.
>
> But the main reason for lgrep is it's interface is modelled after the rgrep
> interface, prompting (and using different input histories) for each argument.
>
> So some of the specific aspects of rgrep also applies to lgrep
> (such as the grep-files-aliases feature).

Ok, thanks for the explanation.
But then I think that

  "For running `grep' in the current directory see `lgrep'."

is badly worded.  M-x grep also runs grep in the current directory.

    Jan D.