Ar an t-ochtú lá déag de mí na Samhain, scríobh Stephen J. Turnbull:
VETO
Aidan, parts of the documentation change are just plain wrong. It is
true that only the low seven bits are used, but "octet" *is* the
correct term,
Certainly in the character set standards, but not _in the arguments to the
function._ Which is the most important thing for the docstring to describe.
Seven bits are not an octet, and up to now we’ve only mentioned that we
treat the arguments as seven bits in the examples, and we’ve never stated it
explicitly.
as all of these standards are *on-the-wire* standards
that presume octet streams as the fundamental representation.
Also, the editorial commentary, such as references to the
unfortunate difference from MIME, doesn't belong in docstrings.
Docstrings should explain how to use the function to somebody who
already knows how XEmacs works, not try to explain how XEmacs works.
?!???! I’m really surprised to see that from you. Why would anyone need to
read the docstring of make-char if they already knew how XEmacs worked in
this aspect of things? The argument list would suffice. There was a similar
discussion on the philosophy of doc strings over at:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2006-01/threads.html#00893
and I’m convinced it reached the wrong conclusion.
--
Santa Maradona, priez pour moi!
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Patches mailing list
XEmacs-Patches(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-patches