From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Hartwig Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#10522: Patch: Improve optional variable and keyword notation in manual Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 09:58:47 +0800 Message-ID: References: <87d3ajh1lt.fsf@goof.localdomain> <87obtgjbag.fsf@pobox.com> <876219egqv.fsf@pobox.com> <871ubwg6kf.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1362794401 16471 80.91.229.3 (9 Mar 2013 02:00:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 02:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel , 10522@debbugs.gnu.org To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 09 03:00:25 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@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 1UE95A-0000lp-HV for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 03:00:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56537 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94o-00024R-Oz for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56897) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94Q-0001e6-Ku for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94E-0007ON-Ni for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:34 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:36255) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94E-0007OD-KK for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94s-0001Os-HD for bug-guile@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 21:00:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Daniel Hartwig Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2013 02:00:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10522 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10522-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10522.13627943775328 (code B ref 10522); Sat, 09 Mar 2013 02:00:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10522) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2013 01:59:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40364 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94T-0001Nq-0X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:37 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ia0-f173.google.com ([209.85.210.173]:65193) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UE94P-0001Na-1B for 10522@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:59:35 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ia0-f173.google.com with SMTP id h37so2057176iak.4 for <10522@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:58:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NQOI6ObKqCMxP/1JyNkK6WcHmoMscCYV2IqwmIWLKFs=; b=CQpB/D3wo36iWqvOy0sstTElcFt4SIwuD50biDLS9CGBwQHSDfZFVFQ+CecPH+HAzQ +P5CvZOQE6+b8tOadPnVKNlI7jl3+gqZ4YUN59xR/zFI70DSiQ1R56tRXnLQgi1daYb2 J5pzdoiO2/DsaZpvh/8Iz1xW7aEM4P+gbps5wLxt2MiEB4qVb41hpeLc66efw0Kxf3B5 44jNXk0c2L8KZi/HrmULvcT8oSNiuLXi/Cw96Pq0+X7iAA+6HdHJiiEgxYv3OKSoojv7 zjRy4FvL8dnNTVAnkTQtqb4+lUDpebGRhT1Q6/Q+c65kJlfKmV2dQu4NlCali4UjiIKP DmzA== X-Received: by 10.50.135.105 with SMTP id pr9mr1102888igb.6.1362794327114; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:58:47 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.64.26.168 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:58:47 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <871ubwg6kf.fsf@pobox.com> 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.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:6891 Archived-At: On 3 March 2013 17:45, Andy Wingo wrote: > On Sun 03 Mar 2013 02:07, Daniel Hartwig writes: > >> Can I ask whether it is preferred to use, e.g. @code{#f}, for the >> default values, as some places seem to and others don't. This patch >> is not using @code, but then, neither does it touch any doc. that was >> previously. > > Good question. Do you have an opinion? I suppose that the context of @deffn is somewhat similar to @code, so the nesting may be considered redundant. However, when I look at cases where non-atomic expressions are used, such as #:lang in: -- Scheme Procedure: eval-string string [#:module=3D#f] [#:file=3D#f] [#:line=3D#f] [#:column=3D#f] [#:lang=3D(current-language)] [#:compile?=3D#f] we see that there is some potential confusion between the close, unescaped (as with @code, =E2=80=98=E2=80=99) nesting of the parens/bracket= s. Further, usage of =E2=80=98=3D=E2=80=99 like that is not valid Scheme code,= so the contexts are actually more distinct than the ealier supposition. This leads me to have a _slight_ preference for using @code, as being more technically correct. Though cases such as the above are in the minority.