Re: master baf1a7a4a0: Turn gv-synthetic-place into a function

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> > >  And if this is the same, how about
> > >
> > >   This function is only useful when used with generalized variables.
> >
> > I prefer the preposition "in" to "with" which sounds more vague to me.
>
> What does it mean to "use a function in generalized variables"? how do
> you use a function _in_ a variable?

A generalized variable is a place (form).  You use a function in a place
form like you use it in any (normal) form.  Just the semantics are
different.  Like in

  (car (gv-synthetic-place ...))

> > Also, some people seem to like saying a function "is" a generalized
> > variable when it has a gv setter.  I'm not sure if they would read your
> > version as intended.
>
> Why not?  For me, using something "with" something else means "in
> conjunction with".  Does the latter also sound problematic to you (and
> if so, why)?  If not, maybe having "in conjunction with" could solve
> the issue?

I just find "in" more precise: The function (call) is an integral part
of the place form, so it's "in" it, textually or syntactically.

English is not my first language, so I hope I'm not on a wrong track,
but for me "in" sounds more appropriate.
If a user reads "in conjunction with" and doesn't know much about
generalized variables, she might wonder "Ok, and how?  Can I pass
generalized variables as arguments?".  The relation is not as clear as
with "in" IMO.

I hope you can follow my concerns.  Does it make sense to you?  I want
to find a wording that potentially leads to as few misinterpretations as
possible.

Michael.