On 5/30/10 May 30 -10:28 AM, Christophe Rhodes wrote:
> Robert Goldman <rpgoldman@...> writes:
>> I'm enclosing a patch file that adds docstrings to
>> sb-ext:disable-debugger and sb-ext:enable-debugger.
>> It also adds these functions (and some other information about the
>> debugger) to the function and concept indices.
>> This is all intended to make it easier to find information about
>> controlling the debugger.
> Thanks. I've merged something like this into a branch for improving the
> manual that I hope to commit to CVS sometime soon (this month, rather
> than this year :-)
>> The only oddity I can see in the patch file is that when I ran the emacs
>> texinfo mode command to update every node, it added previous and next
>> links to nodes in the debugging texinfo file that didn't have them. As
>> far as I can tell, those links are correctly computed, so I left them in.
>> I'm not entirely sure of the patch submission procedure. Please let me
>> know if this one is not prepared properly, and I will try to fix it.
> Well, ideally not having a whole bunch of noise in the patch would have
> been good -- I know emacs put them there, and I know that they were
> "right", but they still made it hard to see what you were actually
Sorry about that. I understand and sympathize, but I confess to not
knowing how to avoid this in the future. Hand-editing the Node lines is
not just a big nuisance, but is also very error-prone, and there's no
way that I know of to leash emacs and tell it to minimize its
modifications. I suppose if I were to do this again with git, instead
of with CVS, I could give two separate patches, one for the text, and
one for the node-shuffling. That's the best I can think of. Perhaps
someone on the list can suggest something better.