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: Stephen Berman
Subject: bug#23746: 25.0.95; Doc fixes (grammar, typos, clarification)
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 18:32:57 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.95 (gnu/linux)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 19:08:57 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

>> 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:
[...]
>> @@ -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.

I don't understand what you mean; the changes in that hunk are strictly
grammatical corrections (underlined).

Steve Berman





reply via email to

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