From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Henrik Enberg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: checkdoc (was: mh-e 6.2 imminent) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:07:45 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <871y69a4fy.fsf@enberg.org> References: <200210240928.g9O9Sjs12808@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5x65vsozso.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <20021024144551.GA9747@gnu.org> <5xsmyvolsh.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5xvg3qyiqp.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <5x7kg4dcr7.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <87elaabbh9.fsf@enberg.org> <20021028213703.GA4555@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035889930 29129 80.91.224.249 (29 Oct 2002 11:12:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk, monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, miles@lsi.nec.co.jp, wohler@newt.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, mh-e-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 186UI4-0007Zf-00 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:12:08 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 186UMe-0002Be-00 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:16:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 186UHL-0004KJ-00; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:11:23 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 186UGI-0001pV-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:10:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 186UG9-0001az-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:10:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailg.telia.com ([194.22.194.26]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 186UG8-0001Vu-00; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:10:09 -0500 Original-Received: from d1o1112.telia.com (d1o1112.telia.com [213.67.192.241]) by mailg.telia.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g9TBA04v006578; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:10:00 +0100 (CET) X-Original-Recipient: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from rocksteady (h148n2fls32o1112.telia.com [213.65.65.148]) by d1o1112.telia.com (8.10.2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g9TB9wg23441; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:09:58 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by rocksteady (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CF90E37B88; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:08:03 +0100 (CET) Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: <20021028213703.GA4555@gnu.org> (Miles Bader's message of "Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:37:03 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.3.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:8882 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8882 Miles Bader writes: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 08:38:10PM +0100, Henrik Enberg wrote: >> I think it's pretty natural to end them with -face. And take something >> like `font-lock-keyword-face', what would be a better name? > > `font-lock-keyword' > > [e.g., (setq font-lock-keyword-face 'font-lock-keyword) ] > >> the current name is self-documenting. > > If we ended every variable in `-variable', they would all be "self > documenting" too. No, that would just be silly. There is no need to to over-consistent. > The question is whether this is useful property, more than it is an annoying > one (and I think you'll agree that calling every variable foo-variable would > be really annoying!). > > When I look at source code [I just did this using grep] that refers to > constant face names, which is the main place where this matters, I see > things like: > > (defface foo-face ...) [...] > (cons 'foo-face list-of-faces) > > Note that all these cases, the `-face' in the face name doesn't help at all, > because the variable/function/macro/property two which the constant face is > being assigned/passed almost always _explicitly_ makes it clear that a face > is being operated upon. In the `-face' suffix seems redundant, because it's > entirely obvious -- even to someone who doesn't understand what the source > code does! -- that it's a face being manipulated. It _is_ pretty redundant when writing code, but from a user perspective, it make them easier to find, I think a typical user is more likely to use ``C-h v'' and apropos than to grep the source code. -- Booting... /vmemacs.el