From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: [External] : Supplying DOC string in a `defun' using `defvar' Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 14:35:53 -0400 Message-ID: References: <871r9ly7v3.fsf@web.de> <87r1hlw6pn.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4567"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Christopher Dimech , "help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 02 20:37:02 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-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 1loVji-0000yP-3Y for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 20:37:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39326 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loVjh-0005KK-0Q for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 14:37:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57926) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loViq-0005K2-KP for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 14:36:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:30521) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loVik-0003fD-Iz for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 14:36:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3610B1002D5; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 14:36:01 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3CF1210028A; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 14:35:55 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1622658955; bh=yK3Ls2bq6lxytSKTzamwxID357YmY1HRKuk4377d2tk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=hn7pvPAuDpB5HzOLmKqQr0Mt+lObAOePjRb9Y+8y/At80g+VC1jzv+xUGf2QkhewP u8LxJDAhXQDojGW5t0+MAHbANF2cE8y2zDyTAzbfcPJ3PxLFn1++PKcJpI6ZuesbFZ A0MnItvDVxnSCZgya9IPZCc81wpIzro89xyTGtWvppHYbgjhujBhApRPl93jz8YdXK /YzQOb6NwzDjf9qICqeVVYFTF3nJqSVm9iSu17F2/mav/m1sTvUWWhPXpKYKQHlwAZ uPD65PTSXuZA89Afa0qmrmVxnooOySVRS4EMm4JZ6qo2QXkq2i3lKCRFebMcgaDvID Jz7CyhcI8L2wg== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-196-163-239.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.163.239]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00C95120151; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 14:35:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:53:31 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:130510 Archived-At: Drew Adams [2021-06-02 15:53:31] wrote: >> > From my point of view, the docstring should have >> > nothing to do with either dynamic or lexical binding. >> No, but > I guess (hope) that your "No, but" really means "Yes, > but", and that you agree that it _should_ indeed have > nothing to do with dynamic or lexical binding. >> it's a new language feature, so it makes sense that >> you need to use the new dialect for it be available. > I don't see how that makes sense at all. It doesn't > follow logically that every "new language feature" > must work _only_ with the lexical binding dialect > turned ON. Indeed it doesn't mean it would be bad to support (:documentation ) in the dynbound case. But it's argument for not bothering to do so. Stefan