[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: defcustom and the stars.

From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: Re: defcustom and the stars.
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 20:30:06 +0100

On 1/4/07, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:

We should not worry about it because 1) it is unlikely to occur


and 2) if it
occurs, the consequences are not great


and the effect will be seen soon enough.

Not agreed (it's not always evident that a variable is a user
variable, unless you look for it).

Unless we're worrying about modifying doc strings by program, which you said
you're not talking about here, I don't think there is a problem with saying
only that any doc string that starts with an asterisk indicates a
`set-variable' target.

I'm not talking about modifying docstrings by program, right now. But
I think the gist of Michaƫl's idea is good (for post-22.1): that
describe-variable should remove the asterisk (that's an implementation
artifact, and has no place in documentation), and indicate when a
variable is a user variable; it already says "You can customize this
variable" for defcustoms, doesn't it?

So, it's not only about "**text*..." cases, but also "*text*..." where
the user-variable'ness is unintended.

I.e., I need to try to understand what you are saying, and it is what you
mean that needs to be convincing to me, not just the words you use to convey
it. I will try better to get your meaning.

Well, don't take too seriously my previous comment, please. :)

That's obvious, perhaps, but I never imagined that an entire conversation
could be conducted that way. Lisp cum lingua franca!

I'm not surprised Lisp is useful for that. It's the most expressive
programming language I've ever used (and comments do help... :)


reply via email to

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