GNU bug report logs - #68145
[PATCH] * doc/misc/eglot.texi: Fix broken function calls

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 68145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: João Távora <joaotavora <at> gmail.com>
To: Felician Nemeth <felician.nemeth <at> gmail.com>,
 Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 68145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Vyacheslav Akhmechet <coffeemug <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#68145: [PATCH] * doc/misc/eglot.texi: Fix broken function
 calls
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 14:46:31 +0000

On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 1:45 PM Felician Nemeth
<felician.nemeth <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Vyacheslav Akhmechet <coffeemug <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> > -  (if-let* ((path (expand-file-name (eglot-uri-to-path
> > +  (if-let* ((path (expand-file-name (eglot--uri-to-path
>
> The latest Eglot has this:
>
> (define-obsolete-function-alias 'eglot--uri-to-path 'eglot-uri-to-path "1.16")
>
> The confusion might come from the fact that ELPA had v1.16 for a brief
> period, but now (for some strange reason) only v1.15 is available.

Strange indeed.  No idea what happened, but the 1.16 tarball is also
available:

https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/eglot-1.16.tar.lz

Stefan, can you see about this.

Vyacheslav, Felicián is correct.  Don't suggest '--' version of
functions in the manuals.  The remaining simplification is
welcome.  Don't use the symbol name 'inactive--code' though,
the '--' means "private".  That symbol can be "inactive-code"
or 'my-inactive-code' or even 'my-extension--inactive-code'.
Here though, "inactive-code" is preferable for demonstration
purposes.

João

Previous Next

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