[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: A question about cycle-spacing--context

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: A question about cycle-spacing--context
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 19:10:52 -0800 (PST)

> > Some of the Emacs developers like to use `--' to indicate an
> As of 24.4, this is also the official recommended style.
> At least, (I think) that's what it said in the news file. 

Same difference. ;-)  See what I wrote about what "internal" means
for something like Emacs:

  its implementation is not guaranteed not to change
  (which is anyway true of any function, var or whatever!).

IOW, much ado about little or nothing.  Just one opinion, of course.

(BTW, I see nothing in NEWS about this, by searching for "--"
or "[Ii]nternal".  The only thing mentioned is that for `cl-lib'
the "internal definitions use the 'cl--' prefix" - and that is
mentioned for Emacs 24.3, not 24.4.)

Personally, I do use the same convention occasionally, but
usually to remind *myself* that the thing in question is
something whose implementation I probably do *not* want to
change lightly.  IOW, in my case it is for the code developer,
not for someone using the code, and it just reminds me that
this stuff is essentially "plumbing".

(BTW2: In a `simple.el' name such as
`repeat-complex-command--called-interactively-skip' (gotta
love that one), added for Emacs 24.4 and removed since, one
wonders whether the `--' might have been introduced less
because the thing was considered internal and more just to
visually separate the `repeat-complex-command' prefix from
the rest of the name, IOW, as a kind of compensation.)

reply via email to

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