Re: lost argument and doc string

[Tak Ota]

13 Feb 2002 19:50:17 +0000: Jason Rumney <address@hidden> wrote:

> Tak Ota <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > --- lib-src/make-docfile.c  Tue Feb 12 11:28:01 2002
> > ***************
> > *** 911,925 ****
> >       else
> >         while (c != ')')
> >           c = getc (infile);
> > -     skip_white (infile);
> >   
> > !     /* If the next three characters aren't `dquote bslash newline'
> > !        then we're not reading a docstring.
> > !      */
> > !     if ((c = getc (infile)) != '"'
> > !         || (c = getc (infile)) != '\\'
> > !         || ((c = getc (infile)) != '\n' && c != '\r'))
> > !       {
> >   #ifdef DEBUG
> >           fprintf (stderr, "## non-docstring in %s (%s)\n",
> >                    buffer, filename);
> > --- 911,920 ----
> >       else
> >         while (c != ')')
> >           c = getc (infile);
> >   
> > !     skip_white (infile);
> > !     if ((c = getc (infile)) != '\"')
> > !             {
> >   #ifdef DEBUG
> >           fprintf (stderr, "## non-docstring in %s (%s)\n",
> >                    buffer, filename);
> 
> 
> Be careful that the following does the right thing:
> 
>     (defvar string-variable "String value" "\
>     This is the documentation for a string variable.")
> 
> 
> That seems like the only logical reason for the current convention.

But my point is that they are all eventually processed by
`read_c_string_or_comment' later, which takes care of backslash
continuation no matter it is the very first thing in the string or in
the middle of it.

The old code is simply enforcing doc string to begin with the line
continuation.  Anything else is rejected.

-Tak