From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bozhidar Batsov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: trunk r115158: * lisp/progmodes/ruby-mode.el (ruby-custom-encoding-magic-comment-template): Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:47:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: <6vfvqpl5gh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e4edafe65a804ec0ed8bf X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385448422 12800 80.91.229.3 (26 Nov 2013 06:47:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 06:47:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 26 07:47:08 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VlCQN-0008FQ-Jc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 07:47:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56752 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VlCQN-0004r4-8V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 01:47:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44235) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VlCQK-0004qx-4T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 01:47:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VlCQJ-0003Ku-8V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 01:47:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-oa0-x22d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22d]:37117) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VlCQH-0003Ke-Oc; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 01:47:01 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id o6so5588100oag.32 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:47:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=byzSSlHJAHhtWqv4u85NCYlCBlqlzkqDxGwXk3J+oF0=; b=xibnNzyTX0fsZzneoxigmdIrDKOK8F9PbhoHwLdVnhP5+ahL3WoZwQiaBnnlVfs1wL UJW6DAb++f6Wn7QFFNgz5+EHrK1WF4mV1soAjuFlB+BvWYCgOncIrMemhnYGoK4Yxmqc 10kiKBRrRAo4V5AcNgEUevHcYxGzAAfCVRc7GCEhdSynqvdxIIbn2RCSsJrVDLfgMAKB vilmJUSvmm6VMvYRiizQLGu3GQH7QCRULMneoRe1osA/47Dxrabg0wvy8Us0cFUFKwTy OwfpcPkiaROgF9tqamEjwfN+2Eyc5qX7CacXV1bBt/yZojP6eRwR4E5CtCQccj+dn+eN iR2w== X-Received: by 10.182.80.196 with SMTP id t4mr28358367obx.1.1385448421088; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:47:01 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.76.21.207 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:47:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: jzT0K8cC4Fnnzy8MsOflEIjCZTE X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22d X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165742 Archived-At: --047d7b2e4edafe65a804ec0ed8bf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks for the suggestion. I'll do the updates today. On 25 November 2013 21:40, Glenn Morris wrote: > Bozhidar Batsov wrote: > > > Since the new functions were extracted from the modified function I > wasn't > > sure if they needed mentioning. > > Basically in a situation like this I should list all symbols like this > > (sym1, sym2...): and write a unified summary regarding > > all of them, right? > > I'd write something like: > > (newfunc1, newfunc2): New functions, extracted from oldfunc. > (oldfunc): Split into several functions, to . > --047d7b2e4edafe65a804ec0ed8bf Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll do the updates today.<= /div>


On 25 No= vember 2013 21:40, Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:
Bozhidar Batsov wrote:

> Since the new functions were extracted from the modified function I wa= sn't
> sure if they needed mentioning.
> Basically in a situation like this I should list all symbols like this=
> (sym1, sym2...): and write a unified summary regarding
> all of them, right?

I'd write something like:

(newfunc1, newfunc2): New functions, extracted from oldfunc.
(oldfunc): Split into several functions, to <do new stuff>.

--047d7b2e4edafe65a804ec0ed8bf--