From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#11565: delayed init variables don't get documentation properties Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:03 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1338123658 18758 80.91.229.3 (27 May 2012 13:00:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 13:00:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 11565@debbugs.gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 27 15:00:57 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1SYd5c-00051h-0y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 15:00:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40412 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd5b-0001er-8F for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55621) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd5Y-0001el-Nz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd5X-0005HK-3U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:52 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:35793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd5W-0005HE-W0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd6f-00058V-QW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:02:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 13:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 11565 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 11565-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B11565.133812370319710 (code B ref 11565); Sun, 27 May 2012 13:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 11565) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 May 2012 13:01:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45339 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd6M-00057q-HF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:01:43 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:47268) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SYd61-00057I-Ut for 11565@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:01:40 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAG6Zu09MCpYd/2dsb2JhbABEtBGBCIIVAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgcBboJkEQDozOBWIMF X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,637,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="182872054" Original-Received: from 76-10-150-29.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.150.29]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 27 May 2012 09:00:04 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BCA7458EC1; Sun, 27 May 2012 09:00:03 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Sat, 26 May 2012 18:29:54 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:60395 Archived-At: > I guess either we undo 3), or change 2) so that it sets the variable to > nil. The latter seems ok to me ...? Undoing the var-part of 3 sounds fine to me. Stefan