From: "Eric M. Ludlam" <eric@siege-engine.com>
Cc: miles@lsi.nec.co.jp, wohler@newt.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org,
mh-e-devel@choochoo.ultranet.com
Subject: Re[2]: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:13:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200210242013.g9OKDH032186@beta.siege-engine.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200210241333.g9ODXjV13949@rum.cs.yale.edu> (monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu)
>>> "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu> seems to think that:
>> Every suggestion from the Emacs Lisp reference manual that could be
>> easily tested, and auto-fixed was put into checkdoc. This has oft
>> provided contention over if the tests were good or bad. I opted not
>> to post judgment and have no personal stake in the different tests.
>
>And I agree with your approach. The only problem I can see really
>(besides those in the coding convention ;-), is that when a
>test fails, the testing is aborted. That is unfortunate when
>I want to leave one argument unmentioned but would still want
>to check that the symbols are properly quoted.
>
>Also that means that C-u checkdoc-current-buffer RET does not
>actually list all the issues. Maybe there's a way to configure
>it differently, but it I didn't see it.
[ ... ]
Yes, the mechanism is not very flexible which is why I had originally
started trying to rearchitect the insides. I guess I couldn't fathom
why anyone would not want to fix all the problems. ;)
The prefix argument should allow more than one error message per doc
string, with a few exceptions in some cascading style checks.
Perhaps it broke somewhere in its history.
Eric
--
Eric Ludlam: zappo@gnu.org, eric@siege-engine.com
Home: http://www.ludlam.net Siege: www.siege-engine.com
Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net GNU: www.gnu.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-24 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-24 12:52 checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent) Eric M. Ludlam
2002-10-24 13:33 ` Stefan Monnier
2002-10-24 20:13 ` Eric M. Ludlam [this message]
2002-11-02 2:51 ` Bill Wohler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200210242013.g9OKDH032186@beta.siege-engine.com \
--to=eric@siege-engine.com \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mh-e-devel@choochoo.ultranet.com \
--cc=miles@lsi.nec.co.jp \
--cc=wohler@newt.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).