[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Predicate for true lists

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Predicate for true lists
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:39:29 +0300

> From: "Basil L. Contovounesios" <address@hidden>
> Cc: <address@hidden>,  <address@hidden>,  <address@hidden>,  <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 19:30:53 +0100
> > The index entry "side effect" here means that this term is explained.
> > But the text doesn't live up to that promise, it just gives an
> > example.  Can we add a more general explanation?
> Sorry, I think I misunderstood how these indices work, and was using
> them to label relevant parts of the documentation, which should probably
> be done with cross-references instead.

If text just mentions a term, but doesn't intend to explain it, it
should indeed provide a cross-reference to where the term is

> The phrase "side effect" is actually defined under (info "(elisp) Intro
> Eval"), so I will remove this index entry.  Is the definition there
> satisfactory and general enough?

Yes, I think so.

> Either way, can the explanation of side effects in (info "(elisp) What
> Is a Function") remain as it is, perhaps with a cross-reference to the
> definition in (info "(elisp) Intro Eval")?

Yes, with a cross-reference.

> >> --- a/doc/lispref/symbols.texi
> >> +++ b/doc/lispref/symbols.texi
> >> @@ -558,9 +558,12 @@ Standard Properties
> >>  modes.  @xref{Setting Hooks}.
> >>  
> >>  @item pure
> >> address@hidden @code{pure}
> >
> > Likewise.
> This is where the property is defined.  If property names are not
> usually indexed, I can remove this index entry.  Otherwise, is the
> following qualification OK?
>   @cindex @code{pure} property

Yes, this is fine.


reply via email to

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