GNU bug report logs - #22748
24.5; (elisp) `Type Predicates': Repeat the rule from `Coding Conventions'

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 22748 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 22748 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: 24.5; (elisp) `Type Predicates': Repeat the rule from `Coding
 Conventions'
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 10:23:32 -0800 (PST)

(elisp) `Coding Conventions' makes clear that a predicate name that has
multiple words should end in `-p', not just `p'.  This should also be
made clear in node `Type Predicates', which currently says only this
about the naming:

  Following a general Lisp convention for predicate functions, most type
  predicates=A1=AF names end with =A1=AEp=A1=AF.

And that node should have a cross reference to node `Coding
Conventions', which details the "general Lisp convention for predicate
functions" that it refers to.


In GNU Emacs 24.5.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2015-04-11 on LEG570
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --prefix=3D/c/usr --host=3Di686-pc-mingw32'

Message #10 received at 22748-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 22748-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#22748: 24.5;
 (elisp) `Type Predicates': Repeat the rule from `Coding Conventions'
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 20:52:03 +0200

> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 10:23:32 -0800 (PST)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> 
> (elisp) `Coding Conventions' makes clear that a predicate name that has
> multiple words should end in `-p', not just `p'.  This should also be
> made clear in node `Type Predicates', which currently says only this
> about the naming:
> 
>   Following a general Lisp convention for predicate functions, most type
>   predicates=A1=AF names end with =A1=AEp=A1=AF.
> 
> And that node should have a cross reference to node `Coding
> Conventions', which details the "general Lisp convention for predicate
> functions" that it refers to.

"Coding Conventions" are about future code; "Type Predicates" describe
the reality.  These two are not necessarily identical.

Closing.

Message #13 received at 22748-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 22748-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#22748: 24.5; (elisp) `Type Predicates': Repeat the rule from
 `Coding Conventions'
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:10:44 -0800 (PST)

> "Coding Conventions" are about future code;

No, they describe the conventions that we follow.
That's general: past, present, future.

> "Type Predicates" describe the reality.  These two are not
> necessarily identical.

Agreed.  But `Type Predicates' specifically points to the
convention.  It should link to it, so readers can understand
just what that _convention_ is - as opposed to the more lax
description of "the reality".

FWIW: I was pretty sure that this convention was described
somewhere, so I tried `i predicate' and then narrowed that
to "type predicates" and landed at `Type Predicates'.

I did not find what I was looking for there, wrt the rule
for naming type predicates.  I then resorted to, yes,
searching the manual (I even searched the Emacs manual, as
well), using regexps such as "[^CM]-p\b"...  Eventually, I
got to (elisp) `Coding Conventions'.

Sure, I should have started there, perhaps.  But I should
have also been able to get there easily from `Type Predicates'
after using `i predicate'.  Just one user, sure.

Why you would not want to add a cross-reference to the
node that actually defines the "general Lisp convention for
predicate functions" is beyond me.  Perhaps you are having
a bad day?  If you don't have time to add that cross-ref
now, why not leave the bug open until someone does?

Why should this node mention, vaguely, "a general Lisp
convention for predicate functions" without helping users
find out what that convention is?

> Closing.

Too bad.

Previous Next

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