On Fri, Jan 14 2022, Jose A. Ortega Ruiz wrote: > on second thought, i think we could perhaps just go for the simpler > "%t", which would allow inserting the type anywhere, even in the middle > of a word... i think a problem here is that "word" or "symbol" (which is > what my suggestion used) constituent depend on the definition of what's > a word or symbol in the active mode. > > although that would prevent fancy things like "%type: %t", but that's a > bit of a corner case, don't you think?
Yes, simpler; the cases where is breaks are (probably?) seldom enough. Also for reference, (replace-regexp-in-string "\\_<%t\\_>" "repl" "foo-%t-bar") ;; does not work (replace-regexp-in-string "\\_<%t\\_>" "repl" "foo %%%t bar") ;; neither... (replace-regexp-in-string "\\_<%t\\_>" "repl" "foo %t bar") ;; worked, but... Tomi > > cheers, > jao > -- > The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher > esteem those who think alike than those who think > differently. -Friedrich Nietzsche, philosopher (1844-1900) _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org