"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> + (default '#'). Note that this option can take values larger than >> + a byte (whether a single multi-byte character, or you >> + could even go wild with a multi-character sequence). > > I don’t know if this expanded description focuses a bit much on the > history of the change[1] or if it is intentionally indirect about this > char-is-really-a-string behavior as a sort of easter egg.[2] > Maybe it could be more directly stated like: > > “ Note that this variable can in fact be a string like `foo`; it > doesn’t have to be a single character. > > (Hopefully UTF-8 is implied by “foo”. Or else “føø”.) That's definitely an improvement, but I would say that using a dingbat instad of "foo", and "single character" -> "single ASCII character" (or "single byte") would make it even clearer. Thanks.
