[drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that the cache is non-persistent]

[drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that the cache is non-persistent]

[Richard Stallman]

Could someone who understands this please DTRT
then ack this message?

------- Start of forwarded message -------
From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: "Emacs-Pretest-Bug" <emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:41:01 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
In-Reply-To: <MEEKKIABFKKDFJMPIOEBGEBIDAAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
Subject: RE: file-cache doc should state that the cache is non-persistent
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=failed 
	version=3.0.4

I said:

    Looking at both the File Name Cache node in the Emacs manual
    and the Lisp source code, I see nothing that indicates whether
    or not the cache is persistent.

    This is an important piece of information. The doc should make
    it clear that the cache is not persistent and that it launches
    `find' each time you use it to find a file.

Sorry; strike the last phrase about `find'. I believe the rest is accurate,
though.



_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
------- End of forwarded message -------

Re: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that the cache is non-persistent]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 17:30:20 -0500
> 
> Could someone who understands this please DTRT
> then ack this message?

Done.  (The cache is not persistent, the manual now says that
explicitly.)

Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with the following
one, "File Convenience"?  They are both short, and the file cache is
certainly a convenience feature of the kind described in the latter
section.

RE: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that thecache is non-persistent]

[Drew Adams]

    > Could someone who understands this please DTRT
    > then ack this message?

    Done.  (The cache is not persistent, the manual now says that
    explicitly.)

Thanks.

    Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with the following
    one, "File Convenience"?  They are both short, and the file cache is
    certainly a convenience feature of the kind described in the latter
    section.

No, I don't think that's a very good idea. File Name Cache is a reasonable,
self-contained topic. File Convenience is, currently, a grab-bag or
catch-all. In the future it will likely become either a menu-driven entry
point or a larger, rambling grab-bag, or disappear altogether (split into
other nodes).

OTOH, File Name Cache could be linked to from File Convenience (and vice
versa?). The best approach would be to clean up Convenience a bit and add a
menu to it that links to the nodes (if they exist) on Image mode, Thumbs
mode, FFAP, Recentf, and File Name Cache. If such nodes don't exist, short
bullets could describe the topics.

---

BTW, following the most widespread convention, we might want to change File
Name Cache to File-Name Cache. I'm not sure what the Emacs doc policy is on
hyphenation, but the most commonly used rule is hyphenation when used as a
(preceding) adjective and separate words when used as a noun: "file-name
cache" and "a cache of file names".

The reason for hyphenating an adjective phrase when it precedes the noun is
to simplify parsing, clarifying the scopes of the modifiers: is it a file's
name cache or a file name's cache? In this case (fnc), the difference in
meaning is not very important, so there is no real problem.

The downside of using such a rule is that searching for "file name" or
"file-name" will not find all occurrences, if both adjective and noun
phrases are used in the text.

Re: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that thecache is non-persistent]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 07:32:11 -0800
> 
>     Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with the following
>     one, "File Convenience"?  They are both short, and the file cache is
>     certainly a convenience feature of the kind described in the latter
>     section.
> 
> No, I don't think that's a very good idea. File Name Cache is a reasonable,
> self-contained topic. File Convenience is, currently, a grab-bag or
> catch-all.

There's nothing wrong with a grab-bag section describing a feature
that has several commands.

RE: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state thatthecache is non-persistent]

[Drew Adams]

    >     Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with
    >     the following one, "File Convenience"?  They are both short,
    >     and the file cache is certainly a convenience feature of the
    >     kind described in the latter section.
    >
    > No, I don't think that's a very good idea. File Name Cache is
    > a reasonable, self-contained topic. File Convenience is, currently,
    > a grab-bag or catch-all.

    There's nothing wrong with a grab-bag section describing a feature
    that has several commands.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with that (though that node could
benefit from a bit more structure (e.g. bullets), as it is essentially a
list).

What I said was that File Name Cache is a self-contained topic. I see no
reason to toss it into the grab bag, but the grab-bag list could (should)
include a link to File Name Cache.

Just one opinion.

Re: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: file-cache doc should state that the cache is non-persistent]

[Richard Stallman]

    Btw, should we merge the "File Name Cache" section with the following
    one, "File Convenience"?  They are both short, and the file cache is
    certainly a convenience feature of the kind described in the latter
    section.

Please do.