Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-12 Thread martin rudalics
Now that I think about it, I realize that many Emacs users have not studied the advanced mathematics where they would encounter the term iff. So I think it is better to avoid that term. (I was the one who introduced it into Emacs doc strings.) I have added this to TODO for fixing post-22

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-12 Thread Stephen Berman
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:46:04 +0200 martin rudalics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now that I think about it, I realize that many Emacs users have not studied the advanced mathematics where they would encounter the term iff. So I think it is better to avoid that term. (I was the one who introduced it

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-12 Thread Richard Stallman
I added `iff' to the Glossary. ___ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-11 Thread Richard Matthew Stallman
The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use it liberally. Now that I think about it, I realize that many Emacs users have not studied the advanced mathematics where they would

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-11 Thread Kim F. Storm
Richard Matthew Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use it liberally. Now that I think about it, I realize that many Emacs users have

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-10 Thread Stefan Monnier
iff stands for if and only if but maybe Return non-nil if and only if we received output before the timeout expired. would be more comprehensible. The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-10 Thread Glenn Morris
Stefan Monnier wrote: The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use it liberally. Sufficiently common in Emacs (~ 600 instances); I've never seen it anywhere else as far as I remember. All it

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-10 Thread Lennart Borgman (gmail)
Glenn Morris wrote: Stefan Monnier wrote: The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use it liberally. Sufficiently common in Emacs (~ 600 instances); I've never seen it anywhere else as far

Re: miss spell in `accept-process-output' doc string

2007-04-10 Thread Stefan Monnier
The iff idiom is sufficiently common that we don't want to shy away from it just at this one place. So either we rule it out everywhere, or we use it liberally. Sufficiently common in Emacs (~ 600 instances); I've never seen it anywhere else as far as I remember. AFAIK it's pretty standard