[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings
From: |
Richard M. Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:59:29 -0400 |
Below is a list of arguments with similar names
of minibuffer functions collected from docstrings and descriptions
in the Emacs Lisp Reference:
prompt, prompt-string
initial, initial-contents, initial-input
history, hist
def, defalt, default, default-value, default-filename, default-dirname
inherit-input-method
require-match, mustmatch, must-match, existing
collection, table, alist
nospace, hide-spaces
directory, dir
It is not necessarily desirable to make them uniform. That may or may
not be an improvement, depending on the details. Thus, the changes
you propose may be good in some cases, but not necessarily in each
one.
So I do not want to make these decisions in a blanket fashion.
How about if you pick one of these groups of alternatives,
make the changes to standardize that group, and send the diff here
to be looked at?
inherit-input-method
THat is not an inconsistency, just long.
collection, table, alist
I don't like "collection" very much.
nospace, hide-spaces
"nospace" and "hide-spaces" suggest different meanings. I don't know
how they are actually used, but it is possible that it is better to
keep them both.
history, hist
The only possible reason not to change "hist" to "history"
is to save space.
require-match, mustmatch, must-match, existing
This seems like a good case to standardize, but it is possible
that there is a reason to use "existing" in a specific case.
- Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Juanma Barranquero, 2005/09/13
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/09/14
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Juri Linkov, 2005/09/15
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings,
Richard M. Stallman <=
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Juri Linkov, 2005/09/16
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/09/17
- RE: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Drew Adams, 2005/09/17
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Robert J. Chassell, 2005/09/17
- RE: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Drew Adams, 2005/09/19
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Robert J. Chassell, 2005/09/19
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/09/18
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Kim F. Storm, 2005/09/19
- RE: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Drew Adams, 2005/09/16
- Re: Argument names in Elisp Reference vs docstrings, Juanma Barranquero, 2005/09/16