Re: Naming of ‘append-to-buffer’

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andreas Röhler <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2018 08:51:10 +0200
> 
> Docstring mentions substring from old buffer "is inserted into that 
> buffer before its point". But the meaning of "append" is a different 
> one. IMO the current behavior might be expressed as ‘copy-to-buffer’ or 
> ‘insert-in-buffer’, as copy-... is taken already. OTOH would appreciate 
> to have a reliable append, i.e. insert at the EOB.

Emacs behaved like that since day one, so renaming the command now
would be unthinkable, IMO.  And there's an expanded explanation in the
user manual why the name makes (some) sense.

Thanks.