GNU bug report logs - #16106
24.3.50; doc of `replace-match'

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 16106 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 16106 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.3.50; doc of `replace-match'
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:56:23 -0800 (PST)

State (in doc string and Elisp manual) that N in \N is not just "a
digit" but a digit from 1 through 9.  Make clear that in "Nth
subexpression", N is one-based, not zero-based.

In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.2 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-11-28 on LEG570
Bzr revision: 115271 rgm <at> gnu.org-20131128203155-qjc1xsp19z2k64b2
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --enable-checking 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1'

Message #8 received at 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16106: 24.3.50; doc of `replace-match'
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 18:54:41 -0800

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> State (in doc string and Elisp manual) that N in \N is not just "a
> digit" but a digit from 1 through 9.  Make clear that in "Nth
> subexpression", N is one-based, not zero-based.

I don't think that makes any sense.  The wording is:

  `\N' means substitute what matched the Nth `\(...\)'.
       If Nth parens didn't match, substitute nothing.

I can't see anybody interpreting Nth as having "zeroth" as a valid
meaning.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

Message #13 received at 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#16106: 24.3.50; doc of `replace-match'
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 19:33:12 -0800 (PST)

> > State (in doc string and Elisp manual) that N in \N is not just "a
> > digit" but a digit from 1 through 9.  Make clear that in "Nth
> > subexpression", N is one-based, not zero-based.
> 
> I don't think that makes any sense.  The wording is:
> 
>   `\N' means substitute what matched the Nth `\(...\)'.
>        If Nth parens didn't match, substitute nothing.
> 
> I can't see anybody interpreting Nth as having "zeroth" as a valid
> meaning.

Most things in Emacs and Lisp in general are zero-based.
It is not obvious that this is one-based.  And Oth and zeroth
make as much sense as 1th and oneth.  If counting is zero-based
then the 0th element is exactly that: the entry that is indexed
by the number zero.

Message #16 received at 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 16106 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#16106: 24.3.50; doc of `replace-match'
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 22:56:25 -0800 (PST)

> Most things in Emacs and Lisp in general are zero-based.
> It is not obvious that this is one-based.  And Oth and zeroth
> make as much sense as 1th and oneth.  If counting is zero-based
> then the 0th element is exactly that: the entry that is indexed
> by the number zero.

Let me put it differently: Is there a good reason NOT to say that
"N is a digit from 1 through 9"?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.