GNU bug report logs - #69709
`sort` interface improvement and universal ordering predicate

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Mattias EngdegÄrd <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>

Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 13:29:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Full log


Message #86 received at 69709 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mattias EngdegÄrd <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 69709 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, dmitry <at> gutov.dev, gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com,
 monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#69709: `sort` interface improvement and universal ordering
 predicate
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 17:13:33 +0100
29 mars 2024 kl. 16.35 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>:

> The canonical sorting order for overlays is in compare_overlays,
> AFAIK.

Maybe, but I haven't see much Lisp code trying to use an order like that -- sorting overlays is common but is done with all kinds of orders. Perhaps I haven't looked very carefully.
In any case, maybe compare_overlays would work as a starting point. It seems to focus on vertical order (by priority), but much Lisp code sorts overlays horizontally (by position).

> Makeinfo can handle @code{@var{..}} just fine, we have that in many
> other places, so that's not a concern.  It is indeed possible to use
> @asis in @table, and then mark each @item with @code, but that's just
> too much trouble; "@table @code" exists to save us that...

Looking at the PDF makes me think that we should decide whether we prefer

  @code{:keyword @var{variable}}

or

  @code{:keyword} @var{variable}

in general. I can think of arguments for either but consistency would be even better.

> I think the places where keywords don't have the @code markup are
> simply wrong.

Yes, I agree.





This bug report was last modified 1 year and 89 days ago.

Previous Next


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