From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.mail.mh-e.devel Subject: Re: MH-E manual update Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:08:12 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <200603112308.k2BN8CO23003@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <27306.1134088031@olgas.newt.com> <871wxfnisy.fsf@olgas.newt.com> <9353.1142107690@olgas.newt.com> <200603112135.k2BLZJE22058@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <11886.1142116037@olgas.newt.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1142118829 6906 80.91.229.2 (11 Mar 2006 23:13:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 23:13:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, mh-e-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 12 00:13:47 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FIDHK-000479-GS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Mar 2006 00:13:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FIDHJ-00008O-Tc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:13:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FIDH7-000063-8R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:13:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FIDH4-0008TH-I3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:13:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FIDH4-0008TB-8y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:13:26 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FIDKd-0000q3-7I; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 18:17:07 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2BNDMwS006877; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:13:22 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id k2BN8CO23003; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:08:12 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: wohler@newt.com In-reply-to: <11886.1142116037@olgas.newt.com> (message from Bill Wohler on Sat, 11 Mar 2006 14:27:17 -0800) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.1 (manatee.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.104]); Sat, 11 Mar 2006 17:13:22 -0600 (CST) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:51496 gmane.mail.mh-e.devel:11944 Archived-At: Bill Wohler wrote: In (texinfo) code: Thus, you should use `@code' for an expression in a program, for the name of a variable or function used in a program, or for a keyword in a programming language. If we are in agreement, this paragraph should be amended to say "for the name *or value* of a variable or function" since it would be inconsistent and complicate usage to use @code for string values and @samp for other values. It already says: "you should use `@code' for an expression in a program". Strings in a program are expressions, be it constant ones. One writes: "The standard value of this variable is @code{nil}", not @samp{nil}. ...with three exceptions in strings.texi and text.texi. A quick grep in the Elisp manual didn't reveal any @samp{.*} (without quotes) that looked like they might be a variable's value. I changed those three to use @code, since they were inconsistent with the vast majority of similar cases. If we are in agreement, can someone who has the Texinfo manual checked out make the clarification in the @code section? Karl Berry maintains that manual, but I am not immediately sure that a change is called for, for the reasons explained above. Sincerely, Luc.