[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#1947: 23.0.60; Please document use of `dired' with an explicit file
bug#1947: 23.0.60; Please document use of `dired' with an explicit file list
Sun, 10 Jul 2011 11:30:59 -0700
> > This is something that ordinary users should be made aware
> > of. Simply mentioning it in the doc string of `dired' is
> > not sufficient.
> I disagree. Users are supposed to read _both_ doc strings and the
> manual. Therefore, something mentioned in the doc string does not
> necessarily has to be described in the manual as well,
* No one said anything about what users are "supposed to do".
* No one argued that either doc strings or the manual is a substitute for the
* No one said that everything that is mentioned in any doc string "necessarily"
needs to be described also in the manual.
Your arguments are facile, but you are arguing against a straw man.
It's about _this_ particular feature, whose description, in passing, in the
`dired' doc string has proven to be insufficient to make users aware of this
very useful feature.
> especially if it's an obscure feature used in special situations.
Not relevant here. This is a very useful, although relatively unknown, feature.
This feature is not obscure by its nature; it is simply not known well enough.
This bug report is about obviating some of that ignorance.
> The manual is for describing things better, in more easily readable
> form, without restrictions of doc string format. But it doesn't have
> to tell everything.
Irrelevant; straw man. No one said the manual has "to tell everything".
Speak not in useless generalities, please. Speak to _this_ bug report; speak
about the documentation of _this_ Dired feature.