Re: 'mule-fonts' hadling (Re: gtk mule-fonts note)

Ilya> That is, only to ensure that specifications being added will Ilya> not be removed by other additions, but not for use in Ilya> instancing. My code did use it for instancing. Ilya> The known usage of the tag suggests that it may be used in Ilya> added specifications regardless of types of devices Ilya> currently initialized. Sorry, no. Because Emacs Lisp by default uses dynamic binding and run-time definition of various things, it's up to the user to verify the usage of any given object. Evidently x-symbol thinks that the 'mule-fonts tag means something other than what it does (which is currently unclear). Ilya> It must be defined before any possible use, that is, very Ilya> early. Or one has to scatter code like: Ilya> throughout packages. Yes. That is the correct approach. Ilya> Do not want. The highest priority for me is ensuring that Ilya> documentation answers to user (my) questions: "What is Ilya> happening to my fonts? Why is the text displayed in these Ilya> particular ones?". That is, describing the current rules. The implementation may very well not conform to the rules. Changing the documentation to reflect the implementation would be to introduce a bug. If you want to conform to the implementation, that's fine, maybe even necessary for your application. But it is wrong to change documentation which may be correct (or at least not incorrect) to reflect buggy behavior, and thus propagate that behavior. -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.