GNU bug report logs - #16308
24.3.50; doc of `font-lock-keywords'

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 16308 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 16308 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 `font-lock-keywords'
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 09:20:42 -0800 (PST)

The description in the Elisp manual, which is our reference, should be
at least as complete as the doc string.  It is not.  In particular, it
does not describe the structure of the value correctly.  It does not
mention the compiled form, with car `t' etc.

The doc string is far more complete.  If anything, it should be the
other way around.  But preferably, both doc string and manual (node
`Search-based Fontification', currently) should each be complete and
correct.

[BTW, the name of that node should use "Search-Based", not "Search-based".]


In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2013-12-27 on ODIEONE
Bzr revision: 115778 rgm <at> gnu.org-20131228000456-1797o8z6veuyozs0
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --prefix=/c/Devel/emacs/binary --enable-checking=yes,glyphs
 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' LDFLAGS=-Lc:/Devel/emacs/lib
 CPPFLAGS=-Ic:/Devel/emacs/include'

Message #8 received at 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16308: 24.3.50; doc of `font-lock-keywords'
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 18:50:06 -0800

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

> The description in the Elisp manual, which is our reference, should be
> at least as complete as the doc string.  It is not.  In particular, it
> does not describe the structure of the value correctly.  It does not
> mention the compiled form, with car `t' etc.
>
> The doc string is far more complete.  If anything, it should be the
> other way around.  But preferably, both doc string and manual (node
> `Search-based Fontification', currently) should each be complete and
> correct.

No, I think the information about the compiled form isn't particularly
relevant for people who are composing the keywords, while it is relevant
for people who examine the variable, so it's fine the way it is.

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

Message #13 received at 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#16308: 24.3.50; doc of `font-lock-keywords'
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 19:21:42 -0800 (PST)

> No, I think the information about the compiled form isn't
> particularly relevant for people who are composing the keywords,
> while it is relevant for people who examine the variable, so
> it's fine the way it is.

Well you think wrong, then.

The Elisp manual is our _reference_.  The info there about
`font-lock-keywords' needs to be complete.  It is not at all
there only for "people who are composing the keywords".

Message #18 received at 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 16308 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16308: 24.3.50; doc of `font-lock-keywords'
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2014 00:02:43 -0500

> Well you think wrong, then.

No, you guys just disagree.  And I side with Lars on this one.


        Stefan

Previous Next

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