[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: Recent change to describe-variable

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: Recent change to describe-variable
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 06:03:09 -0700

> > So if `C-h v' AKA `describe-variable' is going to describe 
> > everything, it should at least filter out self-quoting :symbols
> At your request I installed a change to exclude :keywords

Oh, are we now installing things at the request of one Emacs user/developer?
Someone has an idea s?he thinks is good, so it's installed as part of Emacs?

> but the lexbind-new merge overrode it. So if the current
> predicate is removed it would be good to filter out keywords
> again (though it makes sense to let pass keywords with a
> docstring, which my original patch didn't).

Keywords with a doc string and without.  I agree with the post below by Stefan
to the cited thread: if it has a doc string, include it.  And even if it doesn't
have a doc string, include it ("No documentation" is useful information.)

j>> (defconst :mykeyword :mykeyword)
j>> and even if you add a docstring to that, I'm not sure it is sensible
j>> to show it as a completion of describe-variable...
s> Actually, if it has a docstring, it definitely makes sense.  And if it
s> doesn't, then it's not that much of a problem to include those rare
s> cases in the completion.

It ain't broke.  Please don't fix it.  Let _users_ filter things as they like.
And if some user wants a specialized "`my-describe-emacs-variable' or
`my-describe-documented-variable' then s?he can define the command and post it
to the wiki.  It's not rare (or difficult) for a user to define a specialized
`describe-*' command.

Emacs doesn't need it.
Especially as a replacement for `describe-variable'.

reply via email to

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