From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Technically correct or conceptually easier? Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:22:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ftdlab7g.fsf@oitofelix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="117978"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel To: Bruno =?windows-1252?Q?F=E9lix?= Rezende Ribeiro Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 02 23:23:09 2020 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 1jK7Iq-000UaK-7n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 23:23:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47432 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jK7Ip-0001xj-A8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:23:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54723) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jK7IB-0001V7-Pn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:22:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jK7IA-0006Bd-7G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:22:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:4594) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jK7IA-0006Av-0i; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:22:26 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E0D94102E52; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:22:24 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E5D7102D63; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:22:23 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1585862543; bh=rIPlu2WqXFrzs/EGFZDWTN/a+jTWLtvh99FsmOCLcqw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=flA6nxrtlgJZaM6yz0aPYA+AsqVa+iQMEjJPa1eATE6Nhq8AFo2ckz09dQb3UKlgv TkoBRULS8sB9OO6P2dQo0Wf+MOSn3eK0bseggKP94+5+KKkexfkcFZK5gMyRmCwjll Yffzc2sHCYQWvxqNpzl6ZQ5q1Pfa0dlogVVxisx1/KbwB4cANEqthx79XEcr1HyIXF dC5SIe2ripIBC/8SmBLlNIvNp9KM12YYNWfoTXyKk9XQt6k18Vhi46fStGPNIPpSvV iHIkvstPKOUPklUXz3Qs96/i1q3wgFZv9orpa6rlSxsDdOYGM/ph8daeXMVNqDwyVr fsLpd99ZftzUw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 933481204BA; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:22:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87ftdlab7g.fsf@oitofelix.com> ("Bruno =?windows-1252?Q?F=E9l?= =?windows-1252?Q?ix?= Rezende Ribeiro"'s message of "Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:23:31 -0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:246293 Archived-At: > The first sentence of the documentation says: > > Non-nil means disregard read-only status of buffers or characters. > > OK. And what nil means? I guess the omission of its meaning implies > its meaning is the exact opposite of the one given to a non-nil value; > and apparently this conjecture can be factually verified by > experimentation. Yes, we often rely on the abuse of "if" to mean "if and only if". Usually those abuses allow for less verbose text, so there's a trade-off. I think here the trade-off is worthwhile. At some other places we correctly add an explicit mention of what happens if it's nil. And of course at yet other places we made the wrong call :-( > If the value is a list, disregard =E2=80=98buffer-read-only=E2=80=99 an= d disregard a > =E2=80=98read-only=E2=80=99 text property if the property value is a me= mber of the > list. > > Well, nil is a list. I think this case is a documentation error: it should say "a non-empty list", although admittedly, the context makes it clearish what is meant. Stefan "who likes `iff`"