[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Emacs-diffs] emacs-26 e21f018 2/2: * doc/lispref/functions.texi (Inline

From: Noam Postavsky
Subject: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-26 e21f018 2/2: * doc/lispref/functions.texi (Inline Functions): Fix typo (Bug#30238).
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 19:32:10 -0500 (EST)

branch: emacs-26
commit e21f0189f3fab8264e05c26056324e878f166c1c
Author: Noam Postavsky <address@hidden>
Commit: Noam Postavsky <address@hidden>

    * doc/lispref/functions.texi (Inline Functions): Fix typo (Bug#30238).
 doc/lispref/functions.texi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/doc/lispref/functions.texi b/doc/lispref/functions.texi
index 277a42d..b53d1f0 100644
--- a/doc/lispref/functions.texi
+++ b/doc/lispref/functions.texi
@@ -2093,7 +2093,7 @@ to verify that using @code{defun} actually has 
performance problems.
   After an inline function is defined, its inline expansion can be
 performed later on in the same file, just like macros.
-  It's possible to use @code{defsubst} to define a macro to expand
+  It's possible to use @code{defmacro} to define a macro to expand
 into the same code that an inline function would execute
 (@pxref{Macros}).  But the macro would be limited to direct use in
 expressions---a macro cannot be called with @code{apply},

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]