Re: [Nano-devel] Future of incremental search

[Marco Diego Aurélio Mesquita]

The attached patch is not intended for inclusion. I'm sending it just
to test the behaviour. It should apply to
dd9766c2e025c2df934ae5b8efb934581599e6fd.

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:11 AM, Brand Huntsman <address@hidden> wrote:
> Much better, but it has a few issues.
>
> Do a regex search for "+", it says not found but doesn't beep or indicate the 
> regex is invalid. Change the "[NOT FOUND]" to "[BAD REGEX]".
>

Done on the attached patch.

> I can open the inc-search prompt and press enter to search for previous match 
> but that match no longer shows up in the prompt.
>

This was a bad behaviour non intentionally implemented on the latest
iteration. When <Enter> is pressed on an empty prompt, no search
should be done. The old behaviour has been restored on the attached
patch.

> The delay you implemented is terrible, it makes search more laggy than 
> before. I paste a 90 character line and it takes 2 seconds before the text 
> appears in the prompt and gets highlighted, normal search is instant and it 
> only took about 1 second in the previous patch. And there is noticeable lag 
> when typing in the prompt. I don't know how that wtimeout works but keys need 
> to be drawn to the prompt as they are typed. Only the actual incremental 
> search should be delayed for 250ms.
>
>

Fixed on the attached patch.

Brand, can you test the attached patch and confirm it behaves as expected?

Also, it looks like the only remaining disagreement is regarding what
should occur with the highlight when there is no match. Can we settle
it down to the way it does on the attached patch?

inc_search.diff
Description: Text document