GNU bug report logs - #20411
24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change'

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#20411: closed (24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change')
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 08:29:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Fri, 24 Apr 2015 11:28:16 +0300
with message-id <837ft2ylpb.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#20411: 24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change'
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #20411,
regarding 24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change'
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
20411: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20411
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Eli Barzilay <eli <at> barzilay.org>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change'
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:08:01 -0400

The documentation for `next-single-property-change' has:

  Return nil if the property is constant all the way to the end of
  object.  If the value is non-nil, it is a position greater than
  position, never equal.

Both of these are wrong when a bound is given.

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Eli Barzilay <eli <at> barzilay.org>
Cc: 20411-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20411: 24.3; Docstring of `next-single-property-change'
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 11:28:16 +0300

> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:29:55 -0400
> From: Eli Barzilay <eli <at> barzilay.org>
> Cc: 20411 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> So I still think that it's confusing -- maybe "except when LIMIT is
> non-nil" and possibly a warning that this is different from the
> searching functions?

Thanks, I clarified the doc strings of this and similar functions in
this respect.

Previous Next

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