Re: Regarding outline headings in emacs-lisp libraries

[Jonas Bernoulli]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>   > > 1. A single top-level section called "Code", which can have subsections.
...
>   > However, AFAIU Jonas didn't like 1,
>
> If there ia a fairly simple file, and its code is in one section named 
> "Code" (which is the convention now), what can be wrong with that?

A fairly simple (i.e. short) file does not have to split up the "Code:"
section at all.  If the file gets longer, then the convention calls for
the "Code:" section to be split into sub-section.

I would rather splitting the "Code:" section into multiple sibling
sections, because of the reasons given in the topmost post.

> That's how our files are set up now.  Is someone saying that that
> is unacceptable and they _must_ all be changed?  That seems like an
> unnecessary nuisance.

I am only suggesting that using sibling sections should also allowed and
that it maybe could even become the recommended approach going forward.

Using child sections would continue to be allowed and am not suggesting
that we adjust all existing files to use the sibling style instead.  I
don't think anyone else is suggesting that either.

     Jonas