[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#25193: [PATCH] Improve the doc of re-search-forward and re-search-ba
bug#25193: [PATCH] Improve the doc of re-search-forward and re-search-backward.
Sun, 2 Apr 2017 13:57:00 +0900 (JST)
Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
On Sun, 2 Apr 2017, address@hidden wrote:
Tino Calancha <address@hidden> writes:
Thanks for the report.
You could refer for details to the manual, maybe providing a link to the
proper node; but you don't want to refer to the doc string of another
function 'B' to document the arguments of the current function 'A'.
IMO the doc string of 'A' must introduce all its arguments.
Otherwise, i am worry you could go an step further, f.i.
`search-forward'/ `search-backward' share the same optional arguments, so:
I think it's okay to point to other functions, as long as we keep the
chain to length 1.
Maybe OK (see below for the rest of my answer, like in my example :)
1) doc string `re-search-backward': See the doc string of `re-search-forward'
2) doc string `re-search-forward': See the doc string of
`search-backward' for details.
3) doc string `search-backward': See the doc string of
`search-forward' for details.
4) doc string `search-forward': Wow, you are are very persistent
user! Please see the manual for details, i am a very busy doc string.
But if all of `re-search-backword', re-search-forward',
`search-backward', would say "see doc string of `search-forward'" I
think it would be okay.
OK for me if it's just 1 jump, but i slightly prefer self-contained
docstrings. Don't know what Eli or John might think about it.