From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#39557: 27.0.60; Elisp manual, doc about bignums Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:53:11 -0500 Message-ID: <85imkbyf88.fsf@gmail.com> References: <3d420026-bb32-413f-9a9c-304240aa82e2@default> <8336bhrrb4.fsf@gnu.org> <85sgjgyeya.fsf@gmail.com> <7f19329d-6d7e-40e1-9c5c-ef6b58e25a62@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="55723"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (windows-nt) Cc: 39557@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 12 16:54:33 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1j1uLO-000EJx-Si for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 16:54:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39604 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uLN-0007uu-VC for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:54:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57823) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKy-0007e2-UX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:54:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKx-0000nO-F5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:54:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:52985) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKw-0000m7-A7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:54:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKw-0003ju-5q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:54:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 39557 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 39557-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B39557.158152279914322 (code B ref 39557); Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 39557) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Feb 2020 15:53:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58958 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKF-0003iw-5C for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:53:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qt1-f175.google.com ([209.85.160.175]:33699) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1j1uKD-0003ij-EX for 39557@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:53:17 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qt1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d5so1949479qto.0 for <39557@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 07:53:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=4dAVgHM7/PouiBLrXp42Om3xKgIGTygo8F6/U2wu/r8=; b=bQpuyExUszzWQguhZHlQW/YM3utHyzq8UGiGoksnTHrG+yqGL609wmhQvvTDc8hrmO 0CQ+jG0f0pr2oRBmMPDnp1Bfgfib18S/b/1fa5aXwOAZDhORC7FLY4ou0+J+pMLZAw0S IyfJHHO44o6btFArH4315YV7wN/P7ZIH3WiaWTWNcOEboi0vwgtAwWjfgpwVrugb5Zia xeGFKHb6Nn4zTKuxXcJCQLTUhC3bqzbnyaNxbw1w24rMOLKnNU7F/PCjk9afJV618Z10 HIob2XVnb/ZT6/mpdgftGHdb5vzQSQjvGxNlDwekf8OgIuVqfPb9/8wBKDkbvA5LVgnT njPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=4dAVgHM7/PouiBLrXp42Om3xKgIGTygo8F6/U2wu/r8=; b=IdOKRDrUJF99E/pvWysO4UEdMP4cXbWaqms0zuuRkdhdefGgx+1uauC7SMx5CVAnsM dgUnQMnSMIX4dogWWzJUa88eVx5fgESkm95+zX0pecN/9kuk82jkhLtkXShzKvE/j52B Q1eFAv6Ikb2pTFurrDxp93Bn4uL5FHKRKy9wFXY/8Erjrxy96RnJWEATL5hNFnaFm/gh yVrh3AARXhVNqO798XSnqicNLxQ93J8tioM8ylQhPwTpWbvsyou07CoHA9i7iVVrHt1P Y91bYjtMnhO8T7F/+oOcRz8oVk4jHFAUgdnUN1Vo079njZ9h6zApENLWtUXIqF9vdRhC fDxA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV9z4YwKuJJXXyGNPUX4thcTnq4Go86ZUaFOZrcpYynm53venZF muv8PcQqr7F2ObYNTInKTv0GipU0U90= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzzkS1CJIlE3vBJtx8GlgnkO+TF69LVqLE9dXD1jORS2Z/PVTiHk5rocHWeG8AgE2UCA9VZRw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:6bc9:: with SMTP id b9mr19752913qtt.108.1581522791305; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 07:53:11 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from vhost2 (CPE001143542e1f-CMf81d0f809fa0.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.230.38.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h20sm395949qkk.64.2020.02.12.07.53.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Feb 2020 07:53:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7f19329d-6d7e-40e1-9c5c-ef6b58e25a62@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:34:22 -0800 (PST)") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:175970 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: >> > There seems to be a contradiction here: where we do describe the >> > difference between fixnums and bignums, you argue that we shouldn't, >> > but then you pick up a place where we don't distinguish between them, >> > and you argue that we should... >> >> I think Drew intended the argument that we should distinguish them as a >> sarcastic reductio ad absurdum. > > Not at all. I wonder why you would think that, When you said this: I mean, if you're going to be comparing against a literal value, and the doc slants you toward using `eq' as it does since you *don't* want the doc to slant towards `eq', I read that paragraph as sarcastic. By the way, this I'm really surprised this doc got inserted as it is. is too easily read as a snide jab (I know, you didn't mean it that way), so it would be nice if you could leave out that kind of meta-opinion from future reports.