alx/mu4e
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

improve doc-strings

Browse Source 
The first sentence should summarize the variable's or function's
purpose and it should fit on the first line.  Change existing
doc-string by:

* Move first sentence onto first line even if that makes it _a bit_
  long.
* Move additional notes out of first sentence and add them later,
  possibly as complete sentences.
* If I am uncertain whether doing the above would alter the meaning,
  _don't_ do it.
* If fitting the initial sentence on the first line would require a
  complete rewrite of the doc-string _don't_ do so unless it is very
  easy to do.
* Remove indentation from second and later lines if it is there to
  align them with the first in the source code, instead of in
  `describe-*' output.
* Make "pullet point" lists a bit more consistent.

Obviously this does not fix all problems but it's a start.
This commit is contained in:
Jonas Bernoulli
2012-11-10 14:01:17 +01:00
parent b92d826808
commit 8a3d4c27de
13 changed files with 397 additions and 368 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

30
mu4e/mu4e-mark.el
View File

@ -83,11 +83,11 @@ where
(clrhash mu4e~mark-map))
(defun mu4e-mark-at-point (mark &optional target)
"Mark (or unmark) message at point. MARK specifies the
mark-type. For `move'-marks and `trash'-marks there is also the
TARGET argument, which specifies to which maildir the message is to
be moved/trashed. The function works in both headers buffers and
message buffers.
"Mark (or unmark) message at point.
MARK specifies the mark-type. For `move'-marks and `trash'-marks
there is also the TARGET argument, which specifies to which
maildir the message is to be moved/trashed. The function works in
both headers buffers and message buffers.
The following marks are available, and the corresponding props:
@ -201,8 +201,9 @@ headers in the region. Optionally, provide TARGET (for moves)."
(mu4e-mark-at-point (car markcell) (cdr markcell)))))))
(defun mu4e~mark-get-markpair (prompt &optional allow-something)
"Ask user for a mark; return (MARK . TARGET). If ALLOW-SOMETHING
is non-nil, allow the 'something' pseudo mark as well."
"Ask user for a mark; return (MARK . TARGET).
If ALLOW-SOMETHING is non-nil, allow the 'something' pseudo mark
as well."
(let* ((marks '( ("refile" . refile)
("move" . move)
("dtrash" . trash)
@ -222,8 +223,9 @@ is non-nil, allow the 'something' pseudo mark as well."
(defun mu4e-mark-resolve-deferred-marks ()
"Check if there are any deferred ('something') marks. If there are such marks,
replace them with a _real_ mark (ask the user which one)."
"Check if there are any deferred ('something') marks.
If there are such marks, replace them with a _real_ mark (ask the
user which one)."
(interactive)
(let ((markpair))
(maphash
@ -248,11 +250,11 @@ replace them with a _real_ mark (ask the user which one)."
(defun mu4e-mark-execute-all (&optional no-confirmation)
"Execute the actions for all marked messages in this
buffer. After the actions have been executed succesfully, the
affected messages are *hidden* from the current header list. Since
the headers are the result of a search, we cannot be certain that
the messages no longer matches the current one - to get that
"Execute the actions for all marked messages in this buffer.
After the actions have been executed succesfully, the affected
messages are *hidden* from the current header list. Since the
headers are the result of a search, we cannot be certain that the
messages no longer matches the current one - to get that
certainty, we need to rerun the search, but we don't want to do
that automatically, as it may be too slow and/or break the users
flow. Therefore, we hide the message, which in practice seems to