From: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
To: b3timmons@speedymail.org
Cc: guile-devel <guile-devel@gnu.org>, 10522@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#10522: Patch: Improve optional variable and keyword notation in manual
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:28:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obtgjbag.fsf__12089.752223301$1328297331$gmane$org@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87d3ajh1lt.fsf@goof.localdomain> (Bake Timmons's message of "Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:46:38 -0500")
Hi Bake,
This patch looks great. I do have a couple of comments before
applying. It would probably be useful to have input from others as
well, so I'm copying guile-devel.
On Mon 16 Jan 2012 20:46, Bake Timmons <b3timmons@speedymail.org> writes:
> -@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t] [version=#f] [#:ensure=#t]
> +@deffn {Scheme Procedure} resolve-module name [autoload=#t [version=#f]] @
> + [#:ensure ensure=#t]
Nesting the optional arguments in brackets can get a bit ugly. It is
precise but verbose. But I suppose we should not encourage interfaces
with many optional arguments, so perhaps it is a moot point.
Also, it seems pedantic to repeat the keyword arguments (once as
keyword, once as identifier). Surely #:foo=bar is unambiguous?
Anyway, I'm interested what others think about changes like this.
Cheers,
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-03 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-16 19:46 bug#10522: Patch: Improve optional variable and keyword notation in manual Bake Timmons
2012-02-03 13:28 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
[not found] ` <87obtgjbag.fsf@pobox.com>
2012-02-03 23:54 ` Ludovic Courtès
2012-02-04 3:34 ` Ian Price
2012-02-04 13:16 ` Bake Timmons
2013-03-02 19:36 ` Andy Wingo
[not found] ` <876219egqv.fsf@pobox.com>
2013-03-03 1:07 ` Daniel Hartwig
[not found] ` <CAN3veRdEYBkcFAVtNhZ4Jy20rM-MawdqWsU-gFwQtW6-19XwDw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-03-03 9:45 ` Andy Wingo
[not found] ` <871ubwg6kf.fsf@pobox.com>
2013-03-09 1:58 ` Daniel Hartwig
[not found] ` <CAN3veRfGq=jGjiuisX5RjusQFmdwc1mGDpuaWbEWrE3WZ=vOtA@mail.gmail.com>
2013-03-09 2:03 ` Daniel Hartwig
2013-03-09 8:25 ` Andy Wingo
[not found] ` <871ubp56a6.fsf@pobox.com>
2013-03-10 0:10 ` Daniel Hartwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='87obtgjbag.fsf__12089.752223301$1328297331$gmane$org@pobox.com' \
--to=wingo@pobox.com \
--cc=10522@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=b3timmons@speedymail.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).