Re: prin1 / princ vs message ?

[Tino Calancha]

On Sun, 2 Jul 2017, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote:

> Conclusion of that exchange (sorry for being a little slow to understand 
> everything the 3 of you wrote):
>
> This:
>     (prin1 name)
>     (princ " is ")
>     (princ (if (memq (aref status 0) '(?a ?e ?i ?o ?u)) "an " "a "))
>     (princ status)
>     (princ " package.\n\n")
>
> Can reasonably be replaced by this:
>     (let (sentence (format "The status of package %1$S is `%2$s'.\n\n" name 
> status)))
>     (princ sentence))
>
> Is that correct ? (I am using the numbered fields that Philipp Stephani 
> implemented in June.) 
Yeah, it looks right.