Re: typo in frame.el

[Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
>
>> How about we use "<=>", conventionally, in doc strings, but we also
>> explain this convention in the Emacs manual, for those who have
>> never seen it? If we adopt such a convention, then we should perhaps
>> also conventionally use "=>" for "implies" ("only if") and "<=" for
>> "if".
>
> I object.  Really.  This would carry the message that Emacs is
> intended for mathematicians and/or scientists as main audience.  Apart
> from which those symbols are just ASCII art representations from what
> they are supposed to be.

I agree.  The problem seem to be to find a suitable English expression
that embodies the same meaning.  "Iff" is probably not a good idea,
but I'm not sure expanding it to "if and only if" is enough.  OTOH,
perhaps if the expression is only used in very technical situations,
it would be OK.  Surely someone who program elisp understand
it (although might not understand "iff").