From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: master e4896fc 1/2: Add a new 'flex' completion style
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:37:49 +0200
Message-ID: <83o97eo2pu.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20190213212413.868.40960@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org>
	<20190213212414.D6F4C209C6@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org>
	<m2zhqyzgrp.fsf@gmail.com>
	<CALDnm53DycrwnymFVOYSH+90wrJcqTRkQ9Q45YfJrNBj+dLWRg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226";
	logging-data="214184"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org"
Cc: rpluim@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= <joaotavora@gmail.com>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 14 15:53:25 2019
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17])
	by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1guIO9-000tUZ-LM
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:53:21 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49703 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1guIO8-0003Sn-Et
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:53:20 -0500
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46806)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1guINH-0002bU-HU
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:52:28 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39654)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
	id 1guI9D-0007BN-De; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:37:55 -0500
Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4590 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
	(Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
	id 1guI9C-000616-WD; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:37:55 -0500
In-reply-to: <CALDnm53DycrwnymFVOYSH+90wrJcqTRkQ9Q45YfJrNBj+dLWRg@mail.gmail.com>
	(message from =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= on Thu,
	14 Feb 2019 13:50:15 +0000)
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:233320
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/233320>

> From: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:50:15 +0000
> Cc: emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
> > Iʼm all in favour of respect, but what does that mean in the context
> > of PRED and POINT?
> 
> It means M-x checkdoc shuts up about it, that's what it means :-)
> (or rather flymake's checkdoc backend stops underlining it).
> 
> It also means I'll think twice about adding docstrings to functions
> I modify, even internal functions.
> 
> > What is 'PCM-style'? What does 'massaged' mean? What is the signature of
> > TRANSFORM-PATTERN-FN?
> 
> "It be" take a pattern, and it be return a pattern.
> 
> To be clear, I agree this isn't the best docstring in the world. Is it
> better than what was before, which was nothing?  Perhaps that's
> arguable and I shouldn't have added it in the first place, forcing
> err inviting people like me to go read the source code.  Doing
> a good docstring is hard and I usually reserve those efforts for
> user-visible functions. You could have very well asked me
> what exactly a "PCM-style substring pattern" is, since that's
> just as loosely defined as everything else around those
> parts.

There's no reason to feel offended by Robert's comments.  They mean
well: to make our doc strings better.  They don't mean your change
wasn't an improvement, and surely weren't meant to offend you.

Thanks for making those changes.