From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: defcustom and the stars. Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:22:02 -0800 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1167935011 18811 80.91.229.12 (4 Jan 2007 18:23:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 18:23:31 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 04 19:23:31 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 1H2XFS-0000kR-N5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:23:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H2XFS-0001WB-5o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:23:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H2XFH-0001Vs-4r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:23:19 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H2XFE-0001VQ-FS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:23:17 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H2XFE-0001VN-CK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:23:16 -0500 Original-Received: from [141.146.126.228] (helo=agminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1H2XFE-0001h4-0A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:23:16 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmgw3.us.oracle.com (rgmgw3.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.112]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l04INCND006633 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 12:23:12 -0600 Original-Received: from rcsmt251.oracle.com (rcsmt251.oracle.com [148.87.90.196]) by rgmgw3.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l04HA0Dv016521 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:23:11 -0700 Original-Received: from dhcp-4op11-4op12-west-130-35-178-179.us.oracle.com by rcsmt250.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2334649071167934928; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 11:22:08 -0700 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 Importance: Normal X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= 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:64762 Archived-At: > the docstring (without the asterisk) should *not* start with an asterisk.... > Otherwise, you have: > (defvar my-var nil "**This* is a user variable.") > and some day you hurriedly modify it to: > (defvar my-var nil "*This* is not a user variable.") > and get an unwanted result. OK, yes, that is something different from what I wrote about. I don't see such carelessness as a problem that can or should be cured by program or convention. If you are saying that anyone who starts a doc string with two asterisks, and later wants to change the var to a non-user variable by deleting the leading asterisk, risks forgetting to remove both leading asterisks, then I would say that that is a problem we should not worry about. We should not worry about it because 1) it is unlikely to occur and 2) if it occurs, the consequences are not great and the effect will be seen soon enough. > > people can rephrase the text to avoid starting with `*' if they > don't want `*' to indicate a user variable. > > Yes, that's what I'm saying, only I'm adding that we should perhaps > explain in the docs: "Please take care the docstring *contents* does > not start with an asterisk." I don't think that's necessary, and it could even introduce confusion. Unless we're worrying about modifying doc strings by program, which you said you're not talking about here, I don't think there is a problem with saying only that any doc string that starts with an asterisk indicates a `set-variable' target. > > (In my case, I _do_ want it to indicate a user variable.) > > I understood it the first time. In fact, I understood it on your > previous message. I usually have no trouble understanding your > messages. Pity the reverse is not true. Not your fault, of course. It could be my fault, or, rather, it is at least partly my responsibility. When I was 13, my math teacher taught us not to accept anything on guzzle (i.e. without understanding). What he meant was that if I can't get someone to understand, then it is mainly my fault: the main burden of teaching is on the teacher (or arguer, prover), who needs to find some way to get the point across. His immediate point was about formal proof, but the lesson was a wider one. Language is a hard nut to crack, however. Students (like me, here) also need to try to understand. The burden-of-proof-is-on-the-teacher argument is best viewed at the level of ideas (logic, arguments), not just at the level of language. I.e., I need to try to understand what you are saying, and it is what you mean that needs to be convincing to me, not just the words you use to convey it. I will try better to get your meaning. BTW, I learned from a Japanese user of one of my libraries that Lisp code can be a good way to get around the English barrier sometimes. Quite a bit can be communicated using just sexps with end-line comments that indicate results: (toto) ; => 43 (foo bar) ; => t (EXPECTED nil) That's obvious, perhaps, but I never imagined that an entire conversation could be conducted that way. Lisp cum lingua franca!