help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: problem repeat entry for a number


From: Thien-Thi Nguyen
Subject: Re: problem repeat entry for a number
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:46:22 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux)

() source liu <sourceonly@gmail.com>
() Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:13:55 +0800

   emmm....  that's the way i think so. as i don't exactly know
   the "flag" means, i want to try it out manually, unfortunately
   i choose "minus sign" (is that char '-' on keyboard? ), for i
   think it's equivalent to "C - u" according to the description
   above.

I can see two possible meanings of this sentence:

 C-u following the digits or minus sign ends the argument.

In the first way, we could read it as:

 C-u  following the digits or minus sign  ends the argument.
 ---  ----------------------------------  -----------------
 NP   PREP                                VP

where NP ≡ noun phrase, PREP ≡ prepositional phrase, VP ≡ verb
phrase.  Discarding PREP, the gist of the sentence (NP VP) is:

 C-u  ends the argument.

In the second way, we could read it as:

 C-u  following the digits  or  minus sign  ends the argument.
 ---  --------------------  --  ----------  -----------------
 NP1  PREP                  C   NP2         VP

where C ≡ conjunction.  Discarding PREP, the gist is:

 C-u  or  minus sign  ends the argument.
 ---  --  ----------
 NP1  C   NP2
 -------------------  -----------------
 NP                   VP

I think this is what led you to:

   [...] type C - u 9 '-' to terminate num args input, but it
   direct layout --------- (nine '-'s) in buffer.

   yet i have never tried "C - u" instead of the minus sign '-',
   what a pity that the fact is only several feet away from me.

To a native English speaker, probably the first way above would
seem most natural.  To express the second way, an explicit setup,
commas, and (maybe) an indefinite article, would be used:

 Either  C-u,  following the digits,  or  a minus sign,  ends the argument.
 ------  ---   --------------------   --  ------------   -----------------
 SETUP   NP1   PREP                   C   NP2            VP

Here, SETUP gives a clue that C is forthcoming, the "a" in NP2
gives a clue that "minus sign" is not parallel to "digits" (which
has a definite article "the") and thus is not part of PREP.  Now
this construction is much more verbose and comma-plicated :-D,
and would merit low style marks.  To improve it, one could shift
PREP after NP2, leaving a more idiomatic compound-NP:

 C-u  or  minus sign,  following the digits,  ends the argument.
 ---  --  ----------   --------------------   -----------------
 NP1  C   NP2          PREP                   VP
 -------------------
 NP

Note we drop SETUP, the "a" in NP2, and also one comma.  All
this work just to express well an _incorrect_ description of
the behavior!

So, back to the real problem: Is there anything you would
suggest to the Emacs hackers for the purpose of improving the
text so that it expresses well (unambiguously and in good style)
the _correct_ description (the first way) of the behavior?

   That's the point, i always want to run before i can walk.

That's natural.  In any case, you can run around a lot in Emacs.



reply via email to

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