Two questions about typos in the RC

Two questions about typos in the RC

[Juanma Barranquero]

I suppose 21.3 is nearer every day, and, as I'm kinda an
Obsessive-Compulsive Berserk Typo Hunter, I really *hate* leaving around
known typos; so, I'd appreciate answers for these two questions:

1.- In allout.el, `outline-pre-command-business' has the following
incomplete docstring:

> [...] The outline-mode post-command hook will
> position a cursor that has moved as a result of such reinterpretation,
> on the destination topic's bullet, when the cursor wound up in the
>                                                                  ^^^^^^
> The upshot is that you can get easy, single (ie, unmodified) key
> outline maneuvering operations by positioning the cursor on the bullet
> char. [...]

What's supposed to be there? Any idea? I neither know allout nor trust
that much my English skills...

2.- I recently fixed a bunch of typos in the trunk's lisp/ebnf-* modules
where "syntatic" was used instead of "syntactic" (I consulted with
Vinicius before making the change). I'd like to backport the fixes to RC.
Of course, the fixes to docstrings aren't likely to break anything so
these would be OK. Trouble is, the customization group name should be
changed too. I'd bet the likelihood of some code out there depending on
the name of the customization group of ebnf-*.el is ~ 0, but still,
strictly speaking that's not a bug fix, so I'd like to get a "go" before
changing it...

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

Re: Two questions about typos in the RC

[Richard Stallman]

    2.- I recently fixed a bunch of typos in the trunk's lisp/ebnf-* modules
    where "syntatic" was used instead of "syntactic" (I consulted with
    Vinicius before making the change). I'd like to backport the fixes to RC.

That would be very unwise.  This change is much too global, and nowhere
near important enough.

Re: Two questions about typos in the RC

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 05:08:33 -0500, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> That would be very unwise.

*Very*, indeed? ;-)

> This change is much too global, and nowhere near important enough.

Ok. I'm perhaps too short-sighted so see how changing a customize group
name is "much too global"... but I couldn't agree more about the
"important enough" part.

                                                           /L/e/k/t/u

Re: Two questions about typos in the RC

[Kevin Rodgers]

Juanma Barranquero wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 05:08:33 -0500, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
>>That would be very unwise.
> 
> *Very*, indeed? ;-)
> 
>>This change is much too global, and nowhere near important enough.
> 
> Ok. I'm perhaps too short-sighted so see how changing a customize group
> name is "much too global"... but I couldn't agree more about the
> "important enough" part.


Are these changes to symbols, doc strings, or just comments?  I think not
being able to find the ebnf functions and variables with apropos "syntactic"
would be a bug worth fixing.

-- 
<a href="mailto:&lt;kevin.rodgers&#64;ihs.com&gt;">Kevin Rodgers</a>

Re: Two questions about typos in the RC

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:50:51 -0700
Kevin Rodgers <kevin.rodgers@ihs.com> wrote:

> Are these changes to symbols, doc strings, or just comments?

All of them. There are 16 typos in comments, 15 in docstrings, 1 in a
customize tag and 9 symbols (in fact, 9 times the same symbol, the name
of the customization group ebnf-syntatic, used in the defgroup and the
associated defcustoms).

The comments, docstrings and customization tag are safe, I suppose.

-- 
Juanma Barranquero <lektu@terra.es>