From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: literal newlines in @result{} strings Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:32:09 +0300 Organization: JURTA Message-ID: <87slwottpz.fsf@jurta.org> References: <87k6i38mqg.fsf@jurta.org> <874q96yvcw.fsf@jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1125607898 10285 80.91.229.2 (1 Sep 2005 20:51:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:51:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ttn@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 01 22:51:31 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAvzp-0001oT-KL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:49:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAw45-00010y-3A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:53:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EAw1y-0000S2-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:51:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EAw1s-0000Nx-E3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:51:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EAw1r-0000Ia-4f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:51:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [194.126.101.98] (helo=mail.neti.ee) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EAvsh-0004ww-Fw; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:41:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.neti.ee (80-235-33-163-dsl.mus.estpak.ee [80.235.33.163]) by Relayhost1.neti.ee (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D2AC1EAB; Thu, 1 Sep 2005 23:39:02 +0300 (EEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard M. Stallman's message of "Thu, 01 Sep 2005 11:52:57 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.2.1 (20041222) (Debian) at neti.ee 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:42568 Archived-At: > They return strings which contain newlines. You can write a newline > in a string either with a newline, or with `\n'. So it is meaningless > to argue about which one they return. What I mean is that printed representation of the result of evaluation (which is displayed in the echo area, or inserted into the buffer) contains a literal newline instead of `\n'. So after evaluating examples from the manual users will see different results when examples of output contain `\n' in the manual, and the real displayed output contains literal newlines. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/