From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: use-package has been merged into emacs-29 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:21:16 +0000 Message-ID: <87o7s8s79f.fsf@posteo.net> References: <878rjgd0ej.fsf@posteo.net> <87ilihvbed.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34182"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, John Wiegley To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 12 21:21:52 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1p4pJ9-0008hs-VR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 21:21:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p4pIf-0006Nt-PI; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:21:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p4pIe-0006Nk-EI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:21:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p4pIc-0004Ud-HN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:21:20 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F774240101 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 21:21:16 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1670876476; bh=SUK+F2yEmrSJjhBDb09DhLvzEDP6OaIs0c/UKOAFErY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=CYVmZg+65HzDeRb7BSByi8N3s+xeNrjglKbFswR89d2pDBHg+P9SNjRDAq0foMMc6 O1+fy1sA+jmo5IA+m4qI+Fqg/fafcRjKmij4gtJt/p/I37WUJQJFqN/+l0Pj2ioI8J alJ/Kdlo6KNCAzqxOTJDdkeOtrPiyX+6cTnkK/xW2PGSJeqRdgIIIGdjzsfIdOYNM5 TFyuJJY5k2sdgf3mMlG7kiu3wyp0h1jlYzyo5fLckpstFax5ZQKKigE8Ae+CtEHlEs CtECNAPDPjLEkK/0J0T+xkstnaCvOISwys593q4xcZOMa84xVZ1sD2jxbUq7jYHZKH 7cPS5ofr9oHyg== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4NWCgv6pvZz9rxH; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 21:21:14 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Sun, 11 Dec 2022 17:19:25 -0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:301279 Archived-At: Stefan Kangas writes: > Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> That does make sense, but I believe to have had found instances where >> this was not the case. I'll try and see if I can locate those again. > > That will be appreciated, thanks. I have taken a look again, and it appears I was mistaken. That being said, there are still a few places where I think it is not clear if talking about the macro or the package would be correct. E.g. compare these two excerpts that refer to use package and a keyword: With use-package, you can simplify this using the @code{:bind} keyword, as described in this section. and @code{use-package} supports this with a @code{:map} modifier, taking the local keymap to bind to: Both readings make sense, but the manual is talking about two different things (to be fair: with a major overlap). >> Also, this ties into the other point about the usage of @file. >> Shouldn't the first case be wrapped in @file? > > I don't think we do that elsewhere, do we? See e.g. eshell.texi or > eglot.texi. > > My understanding is that it's "use-package" when referring to the > package as a whole, "@file{use-package}" when referring to the library > (i.e. use-package.el), and "@code{use-package}" when referring to the > macro by that name. Nevermind this, I see that there is only a single instance of "@file{use-package}" left now, and it makes sense (it refers to the file being loaded).