Re: syntax highlighting

[Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se>]

Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro <oitofelix@gnu.org>
writes:

> That docstring, and all the others describing minor
> mode (de)activation commands are somewhat ambiguous
> to me, because, as in math literature, "positive"
> could or not include the number '0', depending on
> author's definition. However, "strictly positive"
> always excludes zero, while "non-negative" always
> includes it. So, I think the latter would be a more
> appropriate term, instead of simply "positive".

Word!

While it is many times an advantage to have
multiple-purpose interfaces, for example

(member 'b '(a b c))  ; (b c)    (1)
(member 'z '(a b c))  ; nil

instead of having (1) evaluate to `t' (for "yes, 'b is
a member"), when there *isn't* any second dimension to
it, I think it is much clearer to just focus on the
obvious usage and say exactly how to do it: "enable it
with `t', disable with `nil', with 1 it works, with -1
it blows up the computer, etc.".

> Ps: Emacs developers, please, take this as a bug
> report ;-)

Yeah, you wish. And me to. But report it the technical
way, it is as fast for you as to write this message.

-- 
underground experts united