--- a/discussion.roff	Thu Jul 05 15:58:40 2012 +0200
+++ b/discussion.roff	Thu Jul 05 16:39:01 2012 +0200
@@ -2772,9 +2772,12 @@
 of the charset name.
 .P
 More important than using active names is using descriptive names.
-Renaming the obscure function
+.VS
+m_unknown(in);  /* the MAGIC invocation... */
+VE
+Renaming the obscure
 .Fu m_unknown()
-was a delightful event.
+function was a delightful event, although it made the code less funny.
 .Ci 611d68d19204d7cbf5bd585391249cb5bafca846
 .P
 Magic numbers are generally considered bad style.
@@ -3910,6 +3913,7 @@
 .Fn uip/*sbr.c
 files confirm the improvement.
 .P
+.\" XXX move this paragraph up somewhere
 One disadvantage needs to be taken with this change:
 The compiler can no longer check the integrity of the interfaces.
 By changing the command line interfaces of tools, it is
@@ -3920,3 +3924,21 @@
 Installing regression tests is a task left to do.
 In the best case, a uniform way of invoking tools from other tools
 can be developed to allow automated testing at compile time.
+
+
+.ig 
+XXX consider writing about mhl vs. mhlproc
+
+sbr/showfile.c
+
+    23          /*
+    24          ** If you have your lproc listed as "mhl",
+    25          ** then really invoked the mhlproc instead
+    26          ** (which is usually mhl anyway).
+    27          */
+
+Sat Nov 24 19:09:14 1984  /mtr (agent: Marshall Rose) <uci@udel-dewey>
+
+        sbr/showfile.c: if lproc is "mhl", use mhlproc for consistency
+        (Actually, user should use "lproc: show", "showproc: mhl".)
+..