Re: ASCII-folded search [was: Re: Upcoming loss of usability ...]

[Artur Malabarba]

> It's not a separate topic if we are now discussing whether to
> indicate char folding in the mode-line etc.

Whether char-folding is on or off (and how to indicate that) is
orthogonal to which char-folding table the user uses.
That is, unless you or someone else plans on implementing the
possibility of combining tables and toggling them individually (which
we don't support yet).

>> True, and which equivalence classes to offer is a whole new topic
>> all by itself. But the implementation is there now, all it takes
>> it to offer more tables for it.
>
> OK, you keep advertising that.

Ahn... do you realise that you replied twice to the same email?

> But it is irrelevant to the
> discussion of whether to indicate char folding in the mode-line.
> How we do char folding doesn't matter in this context.
> What is relevant is that multiple kinds of char folding mean that
> it makes little sense to try to indicate them in the mode-line.
>
> IOW, we should not even think about going down that road,

So you don't want to implement a simple visual indicator, because this
indicator might become harder to implement in the future when we
*might* have multiple tables that can be independently applied? (which
no one has offered to do yet, btw)

> unless
> someone has a brilliant idea of how to handle a plethora of char
> foldings.

Well, if we ever even reach that situation:
  - If no char-folding tables are in use, the indicator will be off.
  - If more than zero char-folding tables are in use, the indicator will be on.
I wouldn't call it brilliant (and please let's not go off on a tangent
discussing the (de)merits of this idea), I'm just saying we don't need
to block this feature now because of the future possibility of
multiple independent char-folding tables.