Search with "Whole words only" option should omit @

[uwekel]

Hi,

when searching with the option "Whole words only", function adresses with a @ prefix will not be included in the search results. This is inconvenient when you want to search or replace a function name. The search should omit the @ character from the word characters list.

Best regards
Uwe

[Little John]

The search should omit the @ character from the word characters list.

Yes, it should.
And the asterisk character (*) has the same problem, already reported a long time ago.

That's why I do not search for whole words in the IDE anymore, it's just unreliable.
Since I realized this problem, I'm using a third party editor for this purpose.
That shouldn't be necessary.

[PB]

Well, the @ and * are part of the "word", so just include them. No biggie.

[Little John]

Well, the @ and * are part of the "word", so just include them. No biggie.

I would also like the world to be that simple ... Unfortunately, this is not the case.
You might want to read the thread to which I posted the link in my previous post, and then reconsider your statement.
if you include @ or * in the word you are searching for, then the search will not find the respective word without @ or *.

In other words, when I want to reliably search and replace a variable or procedure name, I'll have to do 3 search and replace operations:
- one with identifier
- one with @identifier
- one with *identifier

Not exactly a satisfying solution.

[PB]

> if you include @ or * in the word you are searching for,
> then the search will not find the respective word without @ or *

That's right and perfectly logical, because @ and * are PART OF THE NAME.
Just because those chars are not letters, doesn't mean they can be ignored.

> when I want to reliably search and replace a variable or procedure name,
> I'll have to do 3 search and replace operations

Yep, because you have 3 different and distinct objects (var, pointer, procedure).

[uwekel]

PB, i agree with the asterix *, but the @ is just an address operator to the following attached variable or function.

[TI-994A]

...@ and * are PART OF THE NAME...

...3 different and distinct objects (var, pointer, procedure).

Hi PB. With all due respect, the @ is technically not part of the variable or procedure name.

[Little John]

PB, i agree with the asterix * [...]

Unfortunately, I can not agree:

Code: Select all

a=3
b=4
Debug a*b

the @ is technically not part of the variable or procedure name.

Agreed.

Obviously, both * and @ are not (necessarily) part of an identifier name.

[uwekel]

I meant if the asterix belongs to a pointer variable.

[Little John]

I meant if the asterix belongs to a pointer variable.

Yes, of course. I know.

Humans and the compiler can make this distinction.
But the search function of the IDE doesn't know whether an asterisk belongs to a pointer variable, or whether it means "multiply".
That's part of the problem.

[PB]

BTW, the only reason I'm opposed to this, is because it may
lead to something getting replaced that shouldn't. When you
include the @ or * then this risk is totally removed.

[Little John]

it may lead to something getting replaced that shouldn't.

What, for instance?

[TI-994A]

...both * and @ are not (necessarily) part of an identifier name.

...the search function of the IDE doesn't know whether an asterisk belongs to a pointer variable, or whether it means "multiply"...

Operators and address references never form any part of an identifier. But insofar as the search & replace is concerned, perhaps. That is why best practices recommend leaving spaces between variables and operators.

...When you include the @ or * then this risk is totally removed.

It would be even riskier to rename a reference to an identifier and not rename the identifier itself.

[Little John]

Operators and address references never form any part of an identifier.

Yes, that's true. I can't see where I wrote anything different.
What obviously adds to the confusion here is, that the asterisk * can play both the role of an operator, and the role of a part of an identifier (pointer variable).

[...] best practices recommend leaving spaces between variables and operators.

Yep!
That's exactly what I'm doing when writing new PB code.
However, there are not always spaces between variables and operators in my old code, let alone code which I copied e.g. from this forum.
And this will not solve the problem with @ ...

[Tenaja]

In other words, when I want to reliably search and replace a variable or procedure name, I'll have to do 3 search and replace operations:
- one with identifier
- one with @identifier
- one with *identifier

Not exactly a satisfying solution.

This is one of the major reasons I always place spaces around every operator. Even the @ operator allows a space, as wrong as it looks.