bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Nicholas Drozd]

Section 5.7 of the Elisp manual ("Using Lists as Sets") mentions
"standard GNU Emacs Lisp". This makes it sound like there is a
language standard, which is not the case. I suggest changing the word
"standard". Possible alternatives: "basic", "plain", "out-of-the-box".

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Nicholas Drozd <nicholasdrozd@gmail.com> writes:

> Section 5.7 of the Elisp manual ("Using Lists as Sets") mentions
> "standard GNU Emacs Lisp". This makes it sound like there is a
> language standard, which is not the case. I suggest changing the word
> "standard". Possible alternatives: "basic", "plain", "out-of-the-box".

"plain" sounds good to me.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nicholas Drozd <nicholasdrozd@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 12:11:34 -0500
> 
> Section 5.7 of the Elisp manual ("Using Lists as Sets") mentions
> "standard GNU Emacs Lisp". This makes it sound like there is a
> language standard, which is not the case. I suggest changing the word
> "standard". Possible alternatives: "basic", "plain", "out-of-the-box".

It would sound as if there's a standard if "Standard" was capitalized,
which it isn't.

The text is

     Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
     duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.
     Although standard GNU Emacs Lisp does not have them, the ‘cl-lib’
     library provides versions.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.

So "standard" is used here in contrast to CL.  I don't think any of
the proposed replacements pick up that nuance, do they?

We could perhaps simply drop "standard", I think the text will be
understood even without that, given that the reference to CL is so
close.

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Andreas Schwab]

On Okt 19 2019, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> The text is
>
>      Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
>      duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.
>      Although standard GNU Emacs Lisp does not have them, the ‘cl-lib’
>      library provides versions.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.
>
> So "standard" is used here in contrast to CL.  I don't think any of
> the proposed replacements pick up that nuance, do they?

cl-lib is part of Emacs, but not loaded by default.  I think that's what
standard is supposed to mean here.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510  2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
> Cc: Nicholas Drozd <nicholasdrozd@gmail.com>,  37811@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 14:35:58 +0200
> 
> On Okt 19 2019, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> > The text is
> >
> >      Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
> >      duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.
> >      Although standard GNU Emacs Lisp does not have them, the ‘cl-lib’
> >      library provides versions.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.
> >
> > So "standard" is used here in contrast to CL.  I don't think any of
> > the proposed replacements pick up that nuance, do they?
> 
> cl-lib is part of Emacs, but not loaded by default.  I think that's what
> standard is supposed to mean here.

I see your point, but that wasn't my interpretation when I've read
that text.

Anyway, I think just dropping that word will fix the possible
confusion.

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:50:04 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 37811@debbugs.gnu.org, nicholasdrozd@gmail.com
> 
> > >      Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
> > >      duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.
> > >      Although standard GNU Emacs Lisp does not have them, the ‘cl-lib’
> > >      library provides versions.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.
> > >
> > > So "standard" is used here in contrast to CL.  I don't think any of
> > > the proposed replacements pick up that nuance, do they?
> > 
> > cl-lib is part of Emacs, but not loaded by default.  I think that's what
> > standard is supposed to mean here.
> 
> I see your point, but that wasn't my interpretation when I've read
> that text.
> 
> Anyway, I think just dropping that word will fix the possible
> confusion.

Or maybe we should simply say this:

  Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
  duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.  In Emacs
  Lisp, variants of these facilities are provided by the ‘cl-lib’
  library.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Stefan Kangas]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:50:04 +0300
>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>> Cc: 37811@debbugs.gnu.org, nicholasdrozd@gmail.com
>> 
>> > >      Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
>> > >      duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.
>> > >      Although standard GNU Emacs Lisp does not have them, the ‘cl-lib’
>> > >      library provides versions.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.
>> > >
>> > > So "standard" is used here in contrast to CL.  I don't think any of
>> > > the proposed replacements pick up that nuance, do they?
>> > 
>> > cl-lib is part of Emacs, but not loaded by default.  I think that's what
>> > standard is supposed to mean here.
>> 
>> I see your point, but that wasn't my interpretation when I've read
>> that text.
>> 
>> Anyway, I think just dropping that word will fix the possible
>> confusion.
>
> Or maybe we should simply say this:
>
>   Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
>   duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.  In Emacs
>   Lisp, variants of these facilities are provided by the ‘cl-lib’
>   library.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.

Yes, this is much better than the other proposed alternatives.  Please
push such a change.  (The file to edit is emacs/doc/lispref/lists.texi
row 1215.)

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

bug#37811: "standard GNU Emacs Lisp"

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org,  37811@debbugs.gnu.org,  nicholasdrozd@gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:48:59 +0100
> 
> > Or maybe we should simply say this:
> >
> >   Common Lisp note: Common Lisp has functions ‘union’ (which avoids
> >   duplicate elements) and ‘intersection’ for set operations.  In Emacs
> >   Lisp, variants of these facilities are provided by the ‘cl-lib’
> >   library.  *Note (cl)Lists as Sets::.
> 
> Yes, this is much better than the other proposed alternatives.  Please
> push such a change.  (The file to edit is emacs/doc/lispref/lists.texi
> row 1215.)

Done.