From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: literal newlines in @result{} strings
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 11:52:57 -0400
Message-ID: <E1EArN3-0000bt-4B@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <jkr7ccfhdx.fsf@glug.org> <87k6i38mqg.fsf@jurta.org>
	<E1EATgz-0000Jy-Dk@fencepost.gnu.org> <874q96yvcw.fsf@jurta.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1125590995 18430 80.91.229.2 (1 Sep 2005 16:09:55 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 16:09:55 +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 18:09:51 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EArYy-0004jq-F5
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 18:05:16 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EArdD-0001xh-E1
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 12:09:39 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EArYh-0007v3-3T
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 12:04:59 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1EArYd-0007sC-2A
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 12:04:55 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EArYb-0007gw-6q
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 12:04:53 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EArR3-0000FM-BR
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 11:57:05 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1EArN3-0000bt-4B; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 11:52:57 -0400
Original-To: Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org>
In-reply-to: <874q96yvcw.fsf@jurta.org> (message from Juri Linkov on Wed, 31
	Aug 2005 19:27:19 +0300)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:42559
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/42559>

    I meant that these functions return only a literal newline, not `\n'.

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.