[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#17779: 24.4.50; (elisp) `Using Interactive'

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#17779: 24.4.50; (elisp) `Using Interactive'
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2019 20:13:28 +0300

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2019 14:41:55 +0200
> Cc: address@hidden
> Yes, I think you're right -- the text starting with "Providing point or
> the mark" until the end of the example seems like very confusing text to
> include in an introduction to `interactive'.

It isn't an introduction, it's a full description of how to use
'interactive'.  And I find nothing confusing about that part of the
text, I think that single paragraph with 2 examples to illustrate the
issue is quite appropriate here.

Please just leave this alone.  I object in principle to making
significant changes in the manuals based on hair-splitting arguments,
not in the least because someone will always come back later and claim
that the new text is worse, or less clear, or whatever.

At least in the docs, let's please avoid making changes for reasons
that are so minuscule that they need a magnifying glass to see.  We
should not waste our energy making "limit-cycle" kind of changes.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]