[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes
From: |
Per Abrahamsen |
Subject: |
Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Nov 2003 12:10:58 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Juri Linkov <address@hidden> writes:
> I suppose that there is such implicit convention already exists that
> internal variables should have no docstrings. Is it true?
It used to be true back when doc-strings were dumped into the
executable and memory was scarce.
But I believe doc-strings for internal variables and functions are
considered acceptable these days.
There are a couple of naming conventions sporadically used by
functions, like adding "-1" to the name of helper functions, or adding
"internal" to the name of the function.
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, (continued)
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Richard Stallman, 2003/11/20
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Stefan Monnier, 2003/11/20
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Kevin Rodgers, 2003/11/20
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Stefan Monnier, 2003/11/20
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Per Abrahamsen, 2003/11/26
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Simon Josefsson, 2003/11/26
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Juri Linkov, 2003/11/27
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes,
Per Abrahamsen <=
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Richard Stallman, 2003/11/28
- Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Peter S Galbraith, 2003/11/27
Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes, Kevin Ryde, 2003/11/18