From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: (fn ...) - please fill it at the point of generation Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:32:28 +0900 Message-ID: <8763yhk4nn.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <87bq8ajkfm.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1198935177 21474 80.91.229.12 (29 Dec 2007 13:32:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2007 13:32:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 29 14:33:11 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J8boG-00037T-GB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 14:33:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J8bnv-0007Tc-1K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:32:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J8bnr-0007Sz-2x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:32:39 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J8bnp-0007SN-Kn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:32:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J8bnp-0007SJ-EU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:32:37 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp02.dentaku.gol.com ([203.216.5.72]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J8bnl-0006wq-Ej; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:32:33 -0500 Original-Received: from 203-216-100-219.dsl.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.100.219] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp02.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1J8bni-0008Bp-KE; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:32:30 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C6C722FF7; Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:32:28 +0900 (JST) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Fri, 28 Dec 2007 19:23:20 -0800") Original-Lines: 26 X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:85602 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> Why don't you just wrap them yourself, in the code that calls >> `documentation'? Wrapping is, in general, a display thing, so it seems >> best to not add hair in more primitive code to worry about it. > > 1. It's not so easy in my particular context. But this is not about me. It's > about any code that uses doc strings (and cares about line length). Why > change all such code, instead of preventing the bug in the first place? Code > that generates user doc should be smart enough to respect the GNU Emacs > convention for line length. What's the big deal? Why do you assume that applications _want_ it wrapped? It's really not part of the doc string as such, it's an interface description. Wrapping it simply introduces extra noise. > 2. Pretty much all other lines of every doc string are correct in this > regard. Why should this be the lone exception and force all code that uses > doc-strings to patch things up after the fact? See above. -Miles -- The car has become... an article of dress without which we feel uncertain, unclad, and incomplete. [Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media, 1964]