bug#32037: simplify possessive form's "functions' definitions"

[Robert Pluim]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>>  @findex * @r{(multiplication)}
>>  The third line of the example consists of the body of the function
>> -definition.  (Most functions' definitions, of course, are longer than
>> +definition.  (Most function definitions, of course, are longer than
>>  this.)  In this function, the body is the list, @code{(* 7 number)}, which
>>  says to multiply the value of @var{number} by 7.  (In Emacs Lisp,
>>  @code{*} is the function for multiplication, just as @code{+} is the
>
> Thanks, but AFAIK the original wording is perfectly correct English
> (if not more correct).  Why did you think it needed to be changed?

The original is fine. I wish there was less going around changing
perfectly good sentences in our documentation (as opposed to editing
for clarity).

Robert