Subject: RE: bug#358: dabbrev-abbrev-char-regexp

From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:58:40 -0700 (PDT)

> > Yes, that's the intended meaning.  Which is why it should not
> > mention Lisp symbols, which are something else again.
> 
> Oh, your objection is about mentioning `yes-or-no-p'?

No.  It's about mentioning Lisp symbols.   Or even mentioning
"symbol" in the context of Lisp, where it has a particular
meaning.  And it's not an objection - just a suggestion.

> > I don't think any example is needed.  Essentially we are saying
> > here that if a letter has word syntax and `-' has symbol syntax
> > then \"\\\\sw\" matches a word char and \"\\\\sw\\\\|\\\\s_\"
> > matches a word char or a symbol char.  Not worth saying, IMO.
> 
> So the last paragraph would be just:
> 
> For instance, suppose the current buffer is `emacs-lisp-mode'.
> If this variable is nil or \"\\\\sw\\\\|\\\\s_\", then expanding
> `yes-or-no-' looks for a symbol starting with `yes-or-no-'.  If
> you set this variable to \"\\\\sw\", that expansion looks for a
> word prefixed with `no-' (e.g., it would match `no-problem', but
> not `no-problem-found').  If expanding `yes-or-no' it would look
> for a word starting with `no' (e.g. `normal')."
> 
> Or did you mean just drop it entirely?

I meant that it could be dropped.  But what you wrote is also OK.

Please use your own judgment; I'm OK with whatever you decide.

My point was not to confuse people by mentioning Lisp symbols.

Of course, the problem here is that we are talking about expanding
`yes-or-no-p', which in Lisp is a Lisp symbol.  It would probably
be better to talk about using dabbrev in another context, besides
Lisp.  Then it would be clearer that we are talking only about
symbol vs word syntax.