bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#23746: 25.0.95; Doc fixes (grammar, typos, clarification)


From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#23746: 25.0.95; Doc fixes (grammar, typos, clarification)
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:08:57 +0300

> From: Stephen Berman <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 17:54:04 +0200
> 
> In GNU Emacs 25.0.95.1 (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.14.15)
>  of 2016-06-11 built on rosalinde
> Repository revision: 6921f4a5961fb53f8fb24d1a5a3f94266f990f6e

Thanks.  Please go ahead and push to the release branch, with the
following 2 exceptions:

> --- a/doc/lispref/control.texi
> +++ b/doc/lispref/control.texi
> @@ -289,11 +289,11 @@ Conditionals
>  @end example
>  
>  @menu
> -* Pattern matching case statement::
> +* Pattern Matching Case Statement::
>  @end menu

This and related changes just change the letter-case, which isn't
worth the hassle (and could break cross-references from other
manuals).

> @@ -1382,12 +1382,13 @@ Process Buffers
>  @end defun
>  
>  If the process's buffer is displayed in a window, your Lisp program
> -may wish telling the process the dimensions of that window, so that
> -the process could adapt its output to those dimensions, much as it
> -adapts to the screen dimensions.  The following functions allow to
> -communicate this kind of information to processes; however, not all
> -systems support the underlying functionality, so it is best to provide
> -fallbacks, e.g., via command-line arguments or environment variables.
> +may wish to tell the process the dimensions of that window, so that
> +the process can adapt its output to those dimensions, much as it
> +adapts to the screen dimensions.  The following functions allow your
> +program to communicate this kind of information to processes; however,
> +not all systems support the underlying functionality, so it is best to
> +provide fallbacks, e.g., via command-line arguments or environment
> +variables.

This goes against the rest of the changes, which correctly made the
opposite replacement.  I see no reason to make the opposite change
here.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]