Editorial change in emacs manual

Editorial change in emacs manual

[Tomas Nordin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 360 bytes --]

See attached a patch for clarification of what I think is a mistake in
the manual. In the lisp-intro docs, section 3.11 (review) about defun,
there is an example of a defun. The text reads "the function definition
was as follows." and then comes an example of back-to-indentation. That
is a bit confusing, it is as if it was supposed to be the defun of
defun.

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-clarify-function-being-referred-in-emacs-lisp-docs.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1127 bytes --]

From c1d49cb9461ab362a2c78250adff00989108ede0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: tomnor <tomasn@kth.se>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 22:21:59 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] clarify function being referred in emacs lisp docs

---
 doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi |    7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi b/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi
index 5a07a45..afa2506 100644
--- a/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi
+++ b/doc/lispintro/emacs-lisp-intro.texi
@@ -4300,9 +4300,10 @@ documentation, an optional interactive declaration, and the body of
 the definition.
 
 @need 1250
-For example, in an early version of Emacs, the function definition was
-as follows.  (It is slightly more complex now that it seeks the first
-non-whitespace character rather than the first visible character.)
+For example, in an early version of Emacs, the function definition of
+@code{back-to-indentation} was as follows.  (It is slightly more
+complex now that it seeks the first non-whitespace character rather
+than the first visible character.)
 
 @smallexample
 @group
-- 
1.7.10.4