From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lost argument and doc string Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:37:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4634-Mon11Feb2002213740+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> References: <20020210.152812.01367344.Takaaki.Ota@am.sony.com> <20020211173214.3AA9.LEKTU@terra.es> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1013457160 24690 195.204.10.66 (11 Feb 2002 19:52:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Feb 2002 19:52:40 GMT Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16aMVD-0006Q8-00 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:52:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16aML1-0003MC-00; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:42:07 -0500 Original-Received: from balder.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.15]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16aMIK-0003GK-00 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:39:20 -0500 Original-Received: from zaretsky (diup-221-105.inter.net.il [213.8.221.105]) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id BEZ43783; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:39:00 +0200 (IST) Original-To: lektu@terra.es X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: <20020211173214.3AA9.LEKTU@terra.es> (message from Juanma Barranquero on Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:34:14 +0100) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1008 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1008 > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:34:14 +0100 > > > Is it possible that the change in the way doc strings are put in C files > > confuses the Windows port, either the make-docfile program or Emacs > > itself? > > Maybe, but then why some docstrings can be seen just fine? Because some doc strings come from Lisp files? But that's a stab in the dark; it would be nice if someone could step with a debugger through the offending code and see what's going on there. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel