[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Irrelevant digression [was: Re: bug in elisp... or in elisper???]
From: |
ken |
Subject: |
Re: Irrelevant digression [was: Re: bug in elisp... or in elisper???] |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:46:07 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101213) |
On 03/23/2011 12:52 PM Le Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:40 AM, ken <gebser@mousecar.com> wrote:
>> I read dozens of pages and see no gain or merit in reading back through
>> all of them to verify what I read
>
> You don't see any merit to removing misinformation so that others who
> do the same search as you aren't led down the wrong path? Isn't that
> why we are here, to help each other better use Emacs?
Le, you bring a good point. However, it's not often possible to contact
the author of a webpage and if you do somehow do that, who knows if that
author reads email and if so would bother to make the change. More
importantly, as said, I don't have the time or the inclination to search
out that page. I understand the web has bad information and accept that
fact. If I wanted to fix inaccuracies on the web, there are many more
of vastly greater import. If I do happen to run across the page again,
however, I'll post it back here and then anyone who wants to can have at
the author. Also, you could search for yourself; I googled for things
like: emacs, elisp, regular expression(s), and other things, all of
which I can't recall now.
In addition, these list discussions are archived, right? So people
will-- or should-- find them and hopefully won't succumb to the same
inaccuracy as I did.
If you feel the situation demands more than that, then you have your
website with quite a bit of information on elisp. (I've read quite a
bit there. It's a pretty good site... and gets respectable search
rankings.) Post the information there. Heck, the article is virtually
written for you already.
Re: bug in elisp... or in elisper???, Tim X, 2011/03/23