[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Dec 2012 10:30:17 +0200 |
> From: Wolfgang Jenkner <wjenkner@inode.at>
> Cc: eliz@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com
> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 01:21:05 +0100
>
> On Fri, Dec 28 2012, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> [...]
> >> In that case, there are bugs in the other direction, in other nodes of the
> >> manual - nodes that use uppercase for parameters.
> >>
> >> For example:
> >>
> >> `A Sample Function Description' - `count-loop'
> >> `Syntax Table Functions' - `with-syntax-table'
> >> `Using Lexical Binding' - `special-variable-p'
> >> `Syntax Table Internals' - `string-to-syntax'
> >> `Declare Form' - `declare'
> >>
> >> Note that `A Sample Function Description' is the very place where we
> >> explain the
> >> syntax convention and give an example of it. Not a good place to set a bad
> >> example.
> >
> > It's not bad. This is done on purpose, see the Texinfo sources, which
> > use @var in this case.
>
> But other "imaginary" example definitions in intro.texi don't use @var.
> Nor does any "real" @defspec in doc/lispref use that.
The Texinfo manual is ambiguous wrt this issue. It allows using @var
in some cases. The result in print is a slightly different typeface;
in contrast, the result in the Info output is VERY different.
However, since the references to the arguments in the text _always_
use @var, so are rendered in CAPS in Info, I consider this bug report
a rather petty and even an overly-pedantic one.
> Also, in contrast to the makeinfo program, texinfo-format-region would
> produce
>
> -- Special form: count-loop (VAR [FROM TO [INC]]) BODY...
>
> in both cases, with or without @var. Perhaps, that's the reason that
> nobody noticed at the time?
I doubt that, as no one uses texinfo-format-region anymore, since it
doesn't support so many Texinfo features introduced in recent years.
> So is there anything wrong with Drew's revised suggestion (as
> I understand it)?
See above. That said, I don't want to argue anymore, so I installed
your changes on the emacs-24 branch; thanks.
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Drew Adams, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Drew Adams, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Drew Adams, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Drew Adams, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Wolfgang Jenkner, 2012/12/28
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Wolfgang Jenkner, 2012/12/29
- bug#13292: 24.3.50; wrong sytax description in (elisp) Case Tables, Drew Adams, 2012/12/29