GNU bug report logs -
#63861
[PATCH] pp.el: New "pretty printing" code
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: 63861 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2023 12:13:54 -0400
>
> >> +@defun pp object-or-beg &optional stream-or-end
> >> +This function indents and fills the printed representation of an
> >> +object (typically representing ELisp code) to make it more readable
> >> +for humans.
> >> +
> >> +It accepts two calling conventions: if called with two integers
> >> +@var{beg} and @var{end}, it indents and fills the corresponding
> >> +region, presumably containing the printed representation of one or
> >> +more objects, otherwise it takes a @var{object} and an optional
> >> +@var{stream}, and prints @var{object} like @code{prin1}, but does it
> >> +in a prettier way.
> >
> > This text references arguments like @var{object} that are named
> > differently in the @defun line.
>
> Indeed. Assuming you understood what I meant to say, do you have
> a recommendation of how to write it?
Something like this:
The function can be called to pretty-print either a region of text,
presumably containing the printed representation of one or more
objects, or to pretty-print an object. In the first case, the
function must be called with 2 arguments, @var{object-or-beg} and
@var{stream-or-end}, which are integer buffer positions that define
the region; in the second case, @var{object-or-beg} is the object to
print and @var{stream-or-end} is the stream to which to print it,
which defaults to @code{standard-output} if nil or omitted.
> Or maybe, I should leave `pp` alone and add a new `pp-region`
> function instead instead of combining two different calling conventions
> on a single function?
That might be better, indeed, both for documentation and for usage.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 28 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.