Luc Teirlinck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > > Well, Eli suggested "sluggish" instead of the negatively > connotated "hung" (which usually is used for a terminal error > condition), but I think that is misleading. I'd suggest using > something like "Thus, Emacs might be non-responsive at times." > Something like that. > > I used: > > Thus, it might take a while before Emacs responds to your input.
Well, I don't like that better, but that's a matter of taste, and the one doing the work should certainly enjoy the benefits of it. > On the other hand. I kept the "More precisely" (in the second > sentence) which Eli suggested removing, because without it things > did just not seem to flow right. Because the first sentence of a > docstring stands out on its own, it seemed no longer clear that we > were talking about the case where the option was nil, and the > sentence _is_ repeating what was already said in the first sentence, > just in more (I believe necessary) detail. But "more precisely" would imply that the first sentence was imprecise in some manner. I'd rather recommend "In this case, Auto-Revert Mode..." or "With this setting, Auto-Revert Mode...". > Maybe I installed somewhat too early, Oh nonsense. If everybody waited for unanimous applause before installing a reworded, obviously mostly improved doc string, we'd not get Emacs 21.4 out in 2004 anymore. Uh, I mean, uhm... -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
